Poor Weiner

Well, it seems another politician has another sex scandal. Often funny and friend of Jon Stewart Congressman Anthony Weiner admitted that he sent a picture of his weiner in his undies to a woman on the Twitter. He says he meant it as a part of a joke, and that he has done other inappropriate things on the interwebs and the phone, both before and after marrying his wife. He also says he has never met any of these women in person, clearly implying that the hyper-flirtation only happened from very long distances.

I think that as far as political sex scandals go, this is really quite ethical, assuming that Congressman Weiner is not still lying. It’s really nothing compared to Eliot Spitzer and his adulterous use of hookers, or Bill Clinton and the jobs he had his interns doing while he was married. As Congressman Winkie, I mean Weiner (sorry, I had to) said, he didn’t break any laws, and he will cooperate fully with an ethics investigation insuring he didn’t break any House rules. He also didn’t make his wife stand there with him while he confessed as some Eliot Spitzers did. He mentioned that his wife understandably thinks he’s an idiot, but is not divorcing his dumb a**.

I’m comfortable making these statements about Congressman Weiner’s relative morality, assuming that he is not still lying, because, like David Letterman, he took full responsibility for his immoral actions; he made a point to state that the woman who was the recipient of his bulging photo is not responsible for this at all, and should never have been dragged into this mini-scandal. His apologies, his remorse, his shame, and his tears seemed sincere to me. Of course, he could be a good actor, or I could be an idiot who feels bad when boys (or anyone) cry and take responsibility for their actions. Conversely, as much as I love Bill Clinton for his politics, his intelligence, and the nice things he does for the world, he is a good example of a disgusting immoral sex-crazed adulterer who tried desperately not to take responsibility for his actions.

Anthony Weiner didn’t admit to his tweet until, I assume, he realized his past inappropriateness was going to be disinterred. According to the NY Times blog, he made his announcement after another bout of inappropriate internet behavior from a month ago was revealed. Nonetheless, less than two weeks of lies followed by a full confession is really rather impressive for a politician.

If you’re sensing that I hold politicians to much, much lower moral standards than I hold normal humans to, you're absolutely right. Thanks to people like Bill Clinton, Eliot Spitzer, and probably millions more, I have learned to assume that all politicians are either evil in some power-hungry way, or are whores. Perhaps the hunger for power facilitates the slutty behavior, since the slutty behavior might simply be another way to gain or use their power. I don’t know if this hunger for power is a pre-existing condition for politicians, or if it’s something that happens after a person has been in politics and the power they are inherently given morally corrupts him…or her I suppose, but we never seem to hear about female politicians being adulterous sluts. Perhaps the direction of the power-politics causality depends on the individual.

Anyway, the point of all this is that while Anthony Weiner’s wife is absolutely correct in saying her husband is dumb, and while he clearly does have some moral issues, if he is not lying, it’s really nothing compared to the real sex scandals out there, and in my mind, it does not and should not affect his ability to do his job well, and to do good things for the world. If the far-more-sexually-immoral Bill Clinton could do it, then the much-more-moral-because-he-accepts-responsibility Anthony Weiner can definitely do it. I’m glad he is not resigning.

(Note: I added the link to Jon Stewart's coverage of this scandal after I published this blog posting.)

UPDATE June 14, 2011
Here's someone else who doesn't want Anthony Weiner to resign, and who also feels bad for the remorseful virtual adulterer.

UPDATE July 14, 2011


On June 16, Anthony Weiner unfortunately resigned.

I’m Still with Coco

UPDATE May 4, 2010: Conan O'Brien had a nice interview on 60 Minutes.

As everyone except me has known for more than a week now, Conan O’Brien will be on TBS this November at 11 P.M. I only found out the other day when the TV mentioned it; I guess that’s what happens when I don’t keep up with the Twitter or Facebook fan pages or the news in general.


As the title of this blog posting clearly states, I am still with Coco, and I think I always will be Team Conan. I heart Conan; he is talented, funny, and smart.

However, I’m not a big fan of this whole TBS thing. That is not to say that I wouldn’t watch Conan on TBS; I will definitely watch Conan wherever he goes. No one seems to know whether Conan chose not to go to Fox or if Fox chose not to reap the long-term benefits of having Conan, but I do think whoever it was who passed on a Conan-Fox relationship made a huge mistake. I’ve read that Fox might have chosen against having Conan in their late-night time slots because of contracts with lucrative syndicated reruns, and I understand why it would probably be better for Fox in the short term to say “no” to Coco. However, as a broadcasting layperson, I would imagine that Conan O’Brien could do for late-night Fox what David Letterman did for late-night CBS. As far as I knew, there was no reason to watch CBS after primetime (during the times when CBS has had good TV happening during primetime) before Letterman got there, but now, CBS is a prime destination during the late-night hours (for my DVR anyway). I firmly believe that Conan would have the same effect for Fox, though the situation is slightly different in that I do occasionally watch those reruns (such as The Simpsons) that I mentioned.

Speaking of those reruns, that is precisely what Conan will be following when he is on TBS. Obviously, that will be a better lead-in than Jay Leno was when Conan was hosting The Tonight Show, but Fox primetime programming (such as House MD) would be vastly better.

Speaking of lead-ins, it’s funny that Team Leno people, such as the author of this thing from Baltimore, recognize that Jay Leno was a horrible lead-in for the late local news, but at the same time, they don’t seem to get that Leno’s horrible lead-in abilities were the obvious and direct cause of Conan’s poor ratings while he was hosting The Tonight Show. That rather dim article praises Leno for leading in the late-night ratings now that he is back not being funny on The Tonight Show (rather than not being funny in primetime), not appearing to realize that The Tonight Show now has the ratings-causing lead-ins that Leno had always enjoyed but Conan’s Tonight Show never did. That article is filled with bizarre oblivion regarding Leno’s detrimental effects on The Tonight Show’s ratings when he was in primetime. Leno is not the ratings leader because of talent, likeability, humor, guests, or any other quality-related characteristics; it is purely because of the primetime programming that serves as the lead-in for the late local news, The Tonight Show, and Late Night. If Leno’s ratings truly did result from any kind of Leno-ness, then his ratings would have would not have sunken so low when he was in primetime, but obviously, The Jay Leno Show’s ratings were painfully low.

Getting back to funny and talented people, Conan O’Brien will do well no matter where he goes. Some have suggested that he can’t compete with The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report (or Colbert Nation, what the article I just linked to incorrectly called it), but that really doesn’t make sense. The latter shows re-air several times the next day and can be viewed in their entirety online. Additionally, most people have DVRs or other ways to record the TV for later viewing, so people will watch all three shows, as well as Letterman. They will also watch Leno, but only because they will not have changed the channel after Law and Order.

Some people seem to be suggesting that Conan is pulling a Leno (my words, not theirs). The NY Post claims that George Lopez, whose show (Lopez Tonight) Conan will be bumping from 11 P.M. where it currently lives to 12 A.M., was forced to be on Team Conan. This claim has been denied by representatives of George Lopez and TBS. As far as I know, Conan has not responded, however, if this claim is true, I would imagine that it was not Conan who would force George Lopez to support him. If someone really did that, it would presumably be TBS executives. Regarding the Leno-Conan brouhaha, I have argued several times that NBC executives are more to blame than Leno, though a portion of the responsibility does lie on Leno. In this case, regarding the allegedly fake Conan support, there is a good chance that Conan is free from blame. However, regarding the actual moving of George Lopez’s show to a later time, obviously Conan had to be aware of that when he made his deal, and in that sense, one could (and has) argued that he is being Leno-esque. However, there is a vast difference between George Lopez’s show being moved and Conan O’Brien’s Tonight Show being forced to either move or be taken away. The Tonight Show is a television institution, George Lopez’s show is not; the former has been on before midnight for several decades, the latter has not. No offense to George Lopez, but I, and presumably many others, were only vaguely aware that he had a late night show, but everyone knows that The Tonight Show is on, and everyone knew that Conan was the host. Conan is only causing the time-shifting of what I imagine might be a rather unpopular show to a later time; Conan is not causing a firmly established, well-known program to be jolted out of its home, nor is he forcing its host to leave. The situations are very different; Conan is not pushing a popular program into a time slot where it will become less viewed, rather, he is increasing the chances that an unpopular show will likely gain popularity by being on after Conan, that is, by providing a healthy lead-in.

NBC Just Keeps Making Things Worse

Well, so much for the reduced Jay Leno hatred. I’m sure everyone has seen NBC’s obnoxious ad for the return of The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, with the contextually obnoxious anti-Conan lyric “Get back to where you once belonged.” Fortunately, someone corrected that ad with the more appropriate lyric “I’m a creep…I don’t belong here.”

Oh, Jay, you don’t belong there, you just don’t.

After all that Letterman did to try to help Jay, NBC had to go and ruin it. I’m not blaming Jay as much as I’m blaming NBC, because Jay is a robot, and apparently, robots aren’t yet capable of saying no to their network.

The Leno Saga Continues on the Super Bowl

David Letterman and Jay Leno, along with Oprah Winfrey, have come together for a rather funny Super Bowl ad for The Late Show with David Letterman. According to Late Show executive producer Rob Burnettt, all parties, led by Letterman, did it simply to entertain people. They have succeeded, assuming I am people.

The Super Bowl ad is sort of a sequel to Letterman’s 2007 Super Bowl ad with Oprah, following their pseudo-feud.

Of course, this year’s ad follows weeks of comedic clashes between Letterman, Leno, and Conan O’Brien regarding The Tonight Show and Leno’s insistence on hosting it without regard to its rightful host.

This Super Bowl commercial accomplishes two things that Leno was unable to do recently: reinstate his nice-guy image and be funny – or at least recognize what is funny.

Three Things that Irritated Me about Leno’s Oprah Appearance

Everyone seems to be upset with Jay Leno (I mean more than they were before) because when he was on Oprah on January 28, he admitted to lying. He explained that he told a white lie in 2004 when he said he would be retiring in 2009.

This lie isn’t what bothered me. I don’t think I really expected Jay to retire – I only expected him to move on from The Tonight Show. When celebrities say they’re retiring, I generally don’t believe them; I actually share Jay’s view on this, where he told Oprah that while he believes that Oprah believes she will be “retiring,” he doesn’t believe she actually will. Of course she explained to Jay that she has not said she’ll be retiring, rather she is just leaving her show, but the point Jay was making about celebrities in general is the view I share with him.

What did bother me – what drove me insane actually – was the following three things:

1) Leno, as usual and as expected played the victim; he did not take any responsibility for what he did. He refused to accept that he had anything to do with killing Conan’s dream. He blamed the network (as he should), and he blamed the low ratings of The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien. However, he couldn’t admit that he had anything to do with Conan leaving The Tonight Show. He didn’t seem to have any awareness that Conan’s ratings were low most likely as a direct result of the low ratings of The Jay Leno Show, as well as the very existence of Jay’s 10 p.m. show. As many have stated, when Leno hosted The Tonight Show, he had dramas such as Law and Order as his lead-in before the local news – shows that, as David Letterman said, keeps people staring at their TVs for days. Conan didn’t have that; Conan had as his lead-in the low-rated Jay Leno Show whose low ratings almost caused the NBC affiliates to revolt. If NBC didn’t have to remove Jay from 10 p.m., and if Jay had chosen to leave NBC, as one would have expected him to, NBC would never have put Leno back at 11:35 p.m. either to push back The Tonight Show to 12:05 a.m. or to remove Conan from The Tonight Show. Without The Jay Leno Show, The Tonight Show with Conan O’Brien would have had better ratings and therefore would have remained on the air. In fact, even if for some other reason (such as the fact that it was a transition or the increased ratings Letterman got from his scandal) Conan’s ratings hadn’t been good enough, his Tonight Show still would have remained on the air. After all, Leno’s ratings weren’t good for his first three years on The Tonight Show, but NBC kept him on the air. Which brings me to…

2) Leno told Oprah that Conan has been removed because of Conan’s poor ratings. He also claimed that this was the first year in The Tonight Show’s 60-year history where it would lose money. However, if losing money translates to poor ratings, then Jay seems to have forgotten about his first three years on The Tonight Show, where he had poor ratings. No one watched Jay’s Tonight Show until Hugh Grant kindly granted him an interview (that was previously scheduled) after being arrested for prostitution usage. Three years of bad ratings, and NBC didn’t cancel Leno’s Tonight Show. Yet Leno seems to really believe that NBC is canceling Conan’s Tonight Show after seven months of bad ratings. It just doesn’t make sense. (Yes, I do realize NBC cancelled Leno’s 10 p.m. show after five months because of bad ratings, but that is only because of the damage he was doing to their affiliates. When Jay had bad ratings on The Tonight Show, I don’t believe it was affecting the affiliates in such a way.)

3) Jay whined to Oprah about Jimmy Kimmel’s alleged “sucker punch,” where Kimmel made a joke about the Conan-Jay brouhaha. Of course, as Jimmy explained, he thought that since Jay used to be a comedian, he could handle a joke made about him, and go with it, rather than continuing to robotically read cue cards and later rat Kimmel out to Oprah. So Jay whined about Kimmel making a timely and relevant joke about him, yet Jay felt there was nothing wrong with his own “joke” about Letterman, which, really, was a sucker punch…to Dave’s wife. Jay’s joke was in response to Dave’s relentless and hilarious Leno jokes and discussions since this began, and Jay felt that one joke in response to Letterman was sufficient. But Jay’s joke was personal, it was more hurtful to Dave’s wife than to Dave (I would think), it was not timely since the tale of Dave’s infidelity is no longer a current topic at all, and, most importantly, no one found it funny. I didn’t fid it funny, the audience responded with “Oooo”s, and Oprah made it clear that she did not find it funny, and that she felt the joke was beneath Jay. But Jay thought it was funny.

Maybe that’s the problem: Maybe Jay isn’t funny anymore because he just doesn’t know what is funny anymore.

How to Resolve NBC’s Late-Night Woes

(See updates at the end of this posting.)

Apparently the rumors were true – Jay Leno’s 10 p.m. show will be cancelled, and Jay will move back to 11:35 PM in the form of a half hour show, pushing back Conan O’Brien’s Tonight Show and Jimmy Fallon’s Late Night to 12:05 a.m. and 1:05 a.m. respectively, and canceling Last Call with Carson Daly. It’s a shame that Jay should be quasi-cancelled, but I can’t say that I’m surprised. They seem to be blaming the time slot for Jay’s rating loss and Jay’s bringing down of the network (forgive my exaggeration), but maybe it’s not the time slot, maybe it’s Leno.

While I have almost always preferred David Letterman to Leno (I only say “almost” because there was a time when I had no preference), I have always found Leno to be funny and talented. However, since he moved to 10 p.m. – or maybe it started while he was still at the Tonight Show – he’s become less funny, in my opinion. His monologues, based on the few I’ve seen in recent times, contain a large proportion of predictable and unfunny jokes. He’s lost something, perhaps a slight edginess, perhaps in an attempt to cater to larger and earlier audience. Alternatively, perhaps it is my comedic tastes that have changed. After all, I have become obsessed with the refined and highly intelligent hilarity of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. But then again, I still find David Letterman and Conan hilarious, as well as Chelsea Handler and Jimmy Kimmel (whom I unfortunately don’t watch as often as I would like to). So perhaps it isn’t me, after all.

While on the subject of late night comedians who don’t seem funny to me, I don’t understand the appeal of Jimmy Fallon. Sure, he’s cute, he was funny in his SNL days, and he’s likeable. However, I just don’t find him funny on Late Night. In his defense, I’ve only seen about two episodes, but I found both painfully unfunny, with only brief moments of mild laughter, as opposed to my excessive outbursts of laughter while watching the funny shows I mentioned. Jimmy Fallon’s monologues should really be better – a monologue in that format is essentially just SNL’s Weekend Update standing up, and as I mentioned, Jimmy Fallon was funny when he hosted Weekend Update. His monologues are…just…boring.

Getting back to Leno, while I don’t like that NBC and Leno are trying to screw over Conan and Jimmy Fallon by pushing them “deeper into the night” as David Carr said in The NY Times, it would really be a shame to see Leno leave the TV. As I said, he was funny, and I think he still has it in him to be funny again. In fact, I know he still has it in him because traces of his comedic talents are evident in Headlines, and in the interview segments of his show.

It seems that Leno is continuing his tradition of screwing over former Late Night hosts who seek to host The Tonight Show. First, he sneakily stole The Tonight Show from Letterman, its rightful heir, and now he and NBC are seeking to push The Tonight Show with Conan O’Brien to 12:05 a.m., which, (according to this NY Post article) as Seth Meyers said on Weekend Update, is “no longer ‘tonight.’”

According to the NY Post article mentioned above, Conan has not yet made a decision regarding what he will do, though he is considering these comical concepts. Letterman also had a fun idea that I saw after thinking of this rather brilliant idea: Perhaps Leno could co-host Late Night with Jimmy Fallon. Perhaps two formerly funny people turned unfunny could together become funny once again. And what better place for Leno to re-gain his hilarity than on the set of Late Night, where David Letterman gave him a platform to showcase his funnies so many years ago. Clearly, the irony and the poetic justice would also be fun, in that Leno would be effectively demoted to Letterman’s old stomping grounds after Leno (from what I recall from The Late Shift by Bill Carter) sneakily and back-stabbingly pilfered The Tonight Show that was rightfully Dave’s.

In all seriousness, the best solution would probably be to leave Conan O’Brien, Jimmy Fallon, and Carson Daly alone, and to leave Jay Leno in his 10 p.m. time slot. The poor ratings could probably be fixed if Jay stopped kissing up to people, stopped catering to what he thinks the earlier audience wants, and just return to his formerly funny self. Instead of fixing the problem with Leno’s 10 p.m. show, NBC is creating more problems and drama that really is unnecessary. As NBC executive Jeff Gaspin stated (according to the same NY Post article mentioned above), a change such as a 10 p.m. comedy talk show will likely take time to obtain the degree of success the network and its affiliates hope for. I learned that from Howard Stern’s rants in years past, when he would point out the idiocy of radio and probably TV executives who have no patience and don’t seem to understand that changes take time to reach success – that success doesn’t happen over night.

UPDATE January 13, 2010: Conan has admirably decided not to accept NBC's demotion to 12:05 a.m., explaining that it would destroy both The Tonight Show and Late Night.

UPDATE January 19-20, 2010: It looks like this is Conan's final week on The Tonight Show, since all that's left are the minor details of Conan's exit from the evil claws of NBC, who will reportedly be paying Conan and his staff a nice severance of $40 million and allowing him to find work elsewhere. Jay Leno will likely get to steal back The Tonight Show (which is nice since Jay likes to steal things). Leno discussed his thoughts on the subject, of course acting as if he is a blameless saint, as he always does, going so far as to encourage people not to blame Conan, which, as David Letterman correctly and hilariously pointed out, no one has been doing. Leno acted similarly in 2004 as well, when he clearly stated that he would gracefully pass on The Tonight Show to Conan in 2009. But at the time, he neglected to mention that he would ungracefully take it back in 2010.

I feel bad contributing to the Leno hatred, even if he is deserving of it due to his continued back-stabbing and sneaky behavior. The fact is, the real problem is NBC and the idiot executives who work there (it seems Jeff Zucker would be the biggest idiot of them all, based on what everyone is saying). If they had just listened to me and 1) asked Leno to be funny again and 2) kept things the way they were, in time, the ratings might have improved, or at least they could then say they tried. If they had given The Jay Leno Show at 10 p.m. and The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien an appropriate amount of time to settle in, then at least they could say they honored Conan O'Brien's and Jay Leno's contracts...in an honorable way.

UPDATE January 22, 2010: Conan’s severance deal with NBC has been finalized. He will receive $33 million and his staff will receive $12 million. Conan’s final Tonight Show will be tonight, and Leno will return to The Tonight Show on March 1, 2010. Conan will not be permitted to have a competing show until September 2010, and he is forbidden from speaking ill of NBC after he leaves, but Letterman kindly assured us last night that he can and will continue to make fun of NBC.

UPDATE April 15, 2010:  I watched Jimmy Fallon on Late Night a couple of times more recently than when he premiered as well as on The Marriage Ref, and I'm happy to say, he has become funny again.  Also, I like The Marriage Ref, despite people's criticisms of it; I enjoy watching funny celebrities talking and arguing with each other.  Finally, Jay Leno is still not funny.

Double Standards

Tiger Woods and his wife (Elin Nordegren) have provided a real-life alleged example demonstrating the point that I made in a previous blog posting, when the former appeared to have been scratched and beaten with a golf club by the latter before and/or after an alleged car accident, allegedly resulting from an alleged argument between them regarding Woods’ alleged adulterous affairs. The alleged domestic violence portion of all this was denied by Tiger Woods, and dropped quickly by the Florida Highway Patrol, according to this article from The Examiner.

Ironically, Chris Brown (of all people) actually made a nice point (see the Examiner link above) regarding the double standard in our society that I delineate in my discussion of Pink’s lyrics in the above-mentioned blog posting. Our society seems to be significantly less harsh on female perpetrators of domestic violence than male ones. If this situation were reversed, would an investigation of Tiger Woods’ hypothetical alleged violence toward his wife end so quickly? Would the world be so focused on Elin Nordegren’s hypothetical alleged affairs, or would the world be unwaveringly focused on the domestic violence?

Regarding Woods’ affairs, as I’ve said regarding David Letterman’s affairs, it isn’t our business. It is unquestionably wrong, but it is not our business. If Elin Nordegren did assault Woods, that is the real issue. As immoral and despicable as adultery is, assault, even for the sake of vengeance, is far more immoral and criminal. The infidelity of a celebrity is not our business, particularly when that celebrity has spent his public life protecting his and his family’s privacy. If his wife did assault him, he is a victim; if he were a woman, more people might recognize that, and perhaps the investigation into whether domestic violence occurred might have at least appeared more thorough, or might have taken longer than four days to be completed.

If the situation were reversed, the investigation would not have ended so quickly, and people wouldn’t be so focused on the wife’s hypothetical alleged affairs. The world would be making proclamations of “so what if she had affairs, that doesn’t excuse violence against her.” The same should be true in this alleged situation.

The Deadly Effects on Humans of Sarah Palin’s Book

While watching this segment from last night’s Daily Show, I realized that the adorable young children to whom John Oliver read excerpts from Sarah Palin’s book (Going Rogue) have clearly been watching David Letterman’s series, “Things More Fun than Reading the Sarah Palin Memoir.”

The children’s examples of things that would be more fun than hearing a reading of Going Rogue closely parallel those of The Late Show with David Letterman. I believe my jocularity regarding the young children’s viewing of The Late Show is obvious. However, the analogous reactions formed by the young children and David Letterman and his writing staff indicates a potentially universal human reaction to Sarah Palin’s memoir – a reaction involving a preference for violent destruction, physical torture, and even suicide over being exposed to the intensely boring torture of Going Rogue.

This clearly elucidates the very obvious fact that Sarah Palin is evil and perhaps even dangerous to all humans, but particularly to young children. Won’t someone please think of the children?! Sarah Palin’s perilous evil is even recognized by the Mayans, who, according to David Letterman, states that their calendar does predict that "the world will end in 2012, but not from floods, earthquakes, or fires,” but rather from the threat of a Sarah Palin presidency.

This brings me to another segment from last night’s Daily Show. Simply put, I agree almost whole-heartedly with Jon Stewart. He presents the belief of the conservative media that we non-conservatives hate Sarah Palin because she is pretty, she hunts, and she’s Alaskan. That is clearly not the case at all. I actually want to like her because she is pretty. I know, that’s wrong, it’s anti-feminist, etc, but it’s just how I feel. Also, she looks a bit like my mother, whom I love like my own mother (probably because she is my own mother), so that’s actually another reason I want to like Sarah Palin. I don’t particularly like her hunting, it seems wrong, especially when she hunts from a helicopter. But I can’t really hate someone who eats what they hunt, for as a non-vegetarian, I’m one step away from doing that as well, though I could never kill anything directly…I mean, except for spiders and some other insects. Regarding her Alaskan origins, I certainly don’t hate her because she lives in Alaska – that’s ridiculous. The only reason I might hate Alaskans is that they elected Sarah Palin governor. Other than that, I don’t have any problem with Alaskans. I mean, it’s not like they’re New Jerseyans. Anyway, I can forgive the Alaskans for electing her since she resigned as their governor so she could write her memoirs.

So, no, I don’t hate her for those superficial reasons as conservative news people from the land of Fox News might like to believe. Rather, I hate her for, as Jon Stewart says, her emptiness, her non-substantiveness, “the nothing…a conservative boiler plate mad-lib…delivered as though it were the hard-earned wisdom of a life well lived…It’s…the boasting about [her] straight-shootin’, when [she’s] not straight shootin’, [she’s] just a talking point machine.”

But I also hate her on those occasions where she does have some degree of substance. I hate her for her overly conservative political beliefs. I have no problem at all with people believing things that differ from what I believe, of course, but I do have a problem with people who feel they should impose those beliefs, particularly religious beliefs, on the rest of the world. That is precisely what Sarah Palin wants to do. Things like forcing her pro-life perspective on women who should have the right to decide what to do with their bodies and abstinence-only sex education – these are some of the reasons I hate Sarah Palin.

Another reason I hate Sarah Palin is discussed in this segment from last night’s Colbert Report. In Going Rogue, Sarah Palin does not take responsibility for anything; she blames others for anything that goes wrong. Additionally, Going Rogue is factually flawed, and she can’t even accept responsibility for that; it’s not her fault, it’s the fault of the fact-checkers who dare to bring her false facts to light.

I hope that reading this blog has been more fun than reading Sarah Palin’s book.

Comedians' Reactions to Letterman Scandal

After October 1, when David Letterman told the story of the alleged attempted extortion involving his affairs with women who worked for him, I wondered how his fellow comedians would react.

This blog from The Huffington Post and this article from the AP tell of what other comedians have been saying about Dave as of the weekend after his confession. It seems most are being easy on him or not talking about it at all. Jay Leno (The Jay Leno Show), Jimmy Fallon (Late Night), Seth Meyers (Saturday Night Live), and Craig Ferguson (The Late Late Show) have made jokes and comments about Dave’s scandal, but none of them were mean about it (towards Dave, that is; some were rightfully mean toward Robert "Joe" Halderman, the alleged blackmailer), which makes me happy.

In the week since Dave’s confession, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert didn’t say a word about Letterman on The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, so they're with Conan O’Brien (The Tonight Show) and Jimmy Kimmel (Jimmy Kimmel Live!) in not talking about it, which also makes me happy.

I was very interested to know what Howard Stern thinks about Dave’s scandal.

If you read this article from The Examiner, you would think Howard Stern was hateful, and it almost sounds like Howard was screaming about how horrible Dave is. The article doesn’t misquote Howard, but it takes his statements out of context. If I hadn’t heard Howard myself and if I had only read that article, I would seriously hate Howard, and I’m a fan of Howard.

Since I did hear Howard talking about Dave, I can continue to love Howard (and Dave). As I expected and hoped for from Howard, he was completely honest about his thoughts about the situation. He made it clear that he likes Dave, and credits Letterman for always being supportive of him. He also said that Dave came out with this stuff in a brilliant way, and noted that he's a great communicator. But Howard felt that Dave screwing interns creates a really bad work environment where women feel they have to screw the boss to get ahead and men feel like they can't get ahead because they lack the necessary equipment. He also said if his daughters were taken advantage of as interns like that, he would cut off Dave's winkie. All these things are completely understandable, assuming that his affairs were, in fact with interns (I know Holly Hester came forward as having an affair with Dave while she was an intern), and if other interns and staff members were aware of those affairs at the time, and also assuming that Dave was abusing his position of power in the affairs, which we can't be sure of. I don't feel that Howard was mean-spirited towards Dave at all, as the Examiner article above might imply.

And finally, Dave’s reaction to himself was probably the funniest reaction of all the comedians. On the Monday after the confession, Dave spent almost the whole monologue cracking jokes about himself. He followed this hilarious monologue with another heartfelt statement apologizing to his staff and his wife for hurting them, as well as affirming that he did the right thing in confessing. Of course he ended the string of apologies with another apology to Sarah Palin, because it couldn’t hurt.

Dave has really been handling his scandal well. As both Howard Stern and Steve Martin have said, this scandal really does show us that Dave is human, and as Steve Martin noted, we really weren’t sure of that before.

I think the keep-quiet attitude and the lack of mean-spirited jokes from his fellow comedians show the reigning king of late night the respect that he still deserves, particularly since David Letterman is a victim of a felony.

Poor Dave

When I heard about the alleged extortion of David Letterman and his confession, my initial reaction was “Poor Dave.” This was followed by, “Wow, Dave’s a slut, who knew…But Poor slutty Dave.”

Obviously I’m talking about David Letterman’s recent confession of affair(s) he had with women who work for him and the blackmail involving that by Robert “Joe” Halderman, a producer of 48 Hours Mystery.

I first heard about it from my sister, because I had missed Thursday night’s Late Show containing his confession, and I had somehow not been exposed to any media most of yesterday.

I’ve been a fan of Dave’s since I was 14 or 15, and I’ve had a crush on him for most of that time (it dwindled in my early-to-mid twenties when he announced that his then-girlfriend and now-wife was pregnant). After seeing his confession on YouTube, and after reading this article from the AP, not only do I not hate him as some people now do, but my crush seems to be back. At first I thought this resulted from the reminder of his brooding self-criticism and the terrible things that have happened to him (such as the attempted kidnapping of his son and the crazy stalker) that the AP article spoke of.

But as I watched last night’s episode of The Late Show, and watched as the audience still loves him, I realized it was more than that. It was his honesty.

He could have easily played the victim – obviously he is a victim of alleged attempted extortion, but I mean he could have played the victim in ways that he is not – he could have, after explaining what happened with the attempted blackmail, proceeded to say “None of this is true; I did not have sexual relations with those women.” But he didn’t; he admitted that he had sexual relations with women who work for him. It’s not entirely surprising that his affairs would be with women who work for him, since both the woman he dated in the 1980s and his current wife were women who worked for him. (Much like the rest of the world seems to have assumed, I am assuming that there was no sexual harassment or other non-consensual behavior; if that assumption is proved untrue, that would change everything.)

As many have noted, including some blogging people on CNN, he doesn’t state when these things happened. The affairs could have, and probably did, happen before he got married in March, and perhaps even before his now-wife birthed his son. As the people on CNN say, we don’t know the nature of Dave and his now-wife’s relationship. Furthermore, even if he was cheating on her, we don’t know if she forgave him. And, as the bloggy people on CNN say, it’s really not our business.

It’s interesting that I wouldn’t hate someone who’s cheated on their significant other. Generally, I’m not a fan of cheating, and personally, I would never take part in any kind of infidelity. But we don’t’ know for sure that Dave’s actions constitute cheating, and even if they do, his honesty allows me to maintain my respect and love for him, and remain a fan, perhaps with enhanced fan-ness. His honesty doesn’t make cheating right, but it allows us as fans to maintain our love and respect for him. His confession also reminds us that his personal life, beyond what he chooses to reveal to us, is not our business.

While Dave’s celebrity status places him in the public eye, he has kept much of his personal life private. He is not an elected official who is trying to legislate morality (again, I think the bloggy people on CNN, the AP, and probably many others said something along those lines as well). He’s a comedian, and therefore, not a hypocrite for his countless jokes about politicians and other celebrities and their indiscretions, because his job is to make jokes. His personal life and his hypocrisy (if you believe he is a hypocrite) are not relevant to those jokes.

I can’t help but wonder if I would feel the same way if this were happening to a celebrity whom I don’t love. Yeah, I’m pretty sure I’m biased, but I think I would feel similarly, if not as strongly, if it were someone I hated, because the extortion involved is wrong – I mean more wrong than the potential infidelity.

Fun side note about my little Dave obsession: Before watching the blogging people on CNN, upon hearing that Dave’s affairs were with women who work for him, I immediately speculatively concluded that one of them (or perhaps the only one) must have been his assistant who’s made on-air appearances over the years. I won’t say her name here, because that wouldn’t be right, but one of the bloggers on the CNN thing confirms my suspicion, I assume speculatively. Before I knew she existed, when I was a teenager, I dreamed of having her job – so it should have been me…hahahaha, just kidding….maybe….no, no, I am kidding.

I Cheated on Google

Dearest Google, I’ve been unfaithful to you. I’m sorry to be so blunt, Google, but the truth had to come out, especially now, since the time of repentance is upon us.

My transgression occurred a few weeks ago. I was googling something obscure – I had heard something about heavy metals being present in calcium carbonate, the very calcium supplement I take.

But Google, my beloved, you couldn’t find any relevant results, at least not in the first pages of search results, and, Google, you know I don’t look beyond the first few pages generally.

So I tried Bing. Yes, Bing. Like you, Google, it has a cute and amusing name. I once searched Bing before, when I saw their commercial on the TV, purely out of curiosity. At that time, it appeared as though Bing’s results were very similar to yours, Google. So using Bing seemed pointless, for why stray from my beloved Google when there appears to be no additional benefit to Bing.

But on that fateful (and unfaithful) day, Google, when you couldn’t satisfy my web searching needs, I did the very same search at Bing that I had tried at you, Google (I don’t remember what I specifically searched for). And Bing found exactly what I was looking for, right there in the first web result.

There was an article from 2000 talking about a JAMA study that had found lead in a few brands of calcium carbonate, though the amounts were less than one would ingest from food and are (or at least were in 2000) acceptable by FDA standards. It stated that Caltrate (the brand I used to use until it became increasingly more difficult to find the kind I like that contains no Vitamin D since I take that separately; my stopping of Caltrate came long before I discovered its lead content) contained these detectable though safe amounts of lead, but Walgreen’s brand (the one I switched to) contained no detectable lead at all. Tums also contained no lead, which is nice. This is the thing Bing found.

But don’t worry Google, this doesn’t mean I’m leaving you. I still love you dearly, and you remain superior to Bing in other ways. I tried the Bing toolbar -- again, purely out of curiosity, and it was useless. Its only purpose is the search box, which sits in an obtrusive and unattractive blemish in my Internet Explorer (perhaps the Bing toolbar blends more nicely in Vista or Windows 7). The Google Toolbar, on the other hand, blends beautifully and modestly, and contains all those other useful thingies like Autofill, Pop-up Blocker, and other nice features. Also, Google, you have all those other products that I love so dearly, and that I surely could not be happy without.

Rest assured, My Dearest Google, that I will only use Bing on those very rare occasions when you can’t find something. This likely won’t happen often, since this was the first time it did, since that glorious day 8 or 10 years ago when I first googled, after someone on The Late Show with David Letterman website mentioned you, Google. I had never been happy with any search engine before you, Google; you almost always find exactly what I’m looking for.

Are you still upset about my unfaithfulness, Google? Doesn’t it help that my transgression was with Microsoft? You’ve known I’ve had a relationship with Microsoft since Windows 95, Google. But I understand, web searching is your territory, Google, and I’m sorry. I hope you will forgive me Google.

I love you, Google. But I also love Microsoft (most of the time).