Daily Archives: October 3, 2009

David Letterman had sex…what else is new?

David Letterman did exactly the right thing…well, the right thing about bringing the issue to his audience at least. In case you missed it in the last two days, David Letterman had sex with women with whom he worked. Ho-hum. End of story.

For some reason, extortionists and blackmailers love to thrive on “outing” the private sexual experiences of the well-known. The well-known so fear the outcome of such national or world exposure that they often begin to pay to keep things quiet. They are fortunate if they only have to pay once. Often the first payment is a signal to the blackmailer that the infomation is of such value that the victim is willing to continue to pay for the silence.

On Thursday night, David Letterman took the opportunity to bring this situation to light. The next morning the story was in the British tabloids. When I googled David Letterman the first time at 7 there was very little comment. Four hours later there were many more entries now outing the extortioner and one of the women with whom Letterman purportedly had a liason. Everyone was weighing in with a comment.

I was bemused by the fact that one site “Rightpundits” jumped so quickly on the chance to connect Letterman with the president and his “wandering winky tinky”. Get real. Get over it. Obama was elected. He’s your president too.

David Letterman has always struck me as a very unhappy man, coincidentally much like our current president who is also rumored to have a wandering winky tinky. You can see the strain in his face as he copes with life. Such is the case when men lead one life and pretend to lead another. He admits to affairs with various female staff members and yet he criticizes others for the same behavior. Such is not the recipe for inner peace and tranquility.  You will have to find this site on your own. I refuse to link you to it. Don’t make a comment there if you do visit it or his site will donate $.02 to the RNC.

Could the strain on his face be also due to the pressure in his job? Whose face is this blogger referring to? In this day do men still show strain on their faces when having sexual relationships and try to cope with life?

I noticed that Letterman didn’t apologize for his actions. I don’t think his show guests or his viewing audience needed to have an apology. That is between Letterman and the mother of his son. Perhaps she was already aware of it. Perhaps she wasn’t. Perhaps all of this happened over a period of time before she became involved with Letterman. Perhaps it happened during her involvement with him.  I firmly believe that is something private between the two of them.

I find it ludicrous to believe that all those years Letterman had his talk show that he would maintain celebacy. His whole life was bound up with that show many hours a day. It is most logical to assume that he would form romantic attachments to those with whom he had the most frequent contacts.  If it were a matter that he was using his position of power to force one of the young women in question to have a relationship, then that should be dealt with. However, that information would have to come from her. I don’t believe that any crimes were committed so it is not a matter for public record any way. If it were consentual, it should be dealt with in an entirely different manner.

As usual, it will probably be the young woman who will get the wrong end of the stick here. She still has a long time for employment ahead of her. If David Letterman is let go, I’m sure he will not miss his current income from his job in this lifetime. She probably knew, on some level, the repercussions of having a sexual relationship with her boss. Fame and power, however, are powerful aphrodisiacs for some young women. Maybe she just couldn’t resist.

Letterman did the right thing by going public right away. He defused the situation immediately. He was not like other powerful politicians and self important US figures who deny, deny, deny. I’m writing this on Friday. When it is posted on Saturday, hopefully it will already be old news. At least when people read newspapers they could “wrap the fish” in them.

He said he would like to protect the other women, his wife, his son, himself, and hopefully his job. He also said that if the other women want to come forward, that is up to them. Personally, I usually don’t bother to read tell-all books. The ones who do, thrive on living their lurid experiences through the lives of others.

Along this same line of thought, I have felt for a long time that persons with different sexual orientations should be able to live openly with their partners in any work field they choose. In the recent past, anyone who openly admitted their “deviant” sexual orientation would not be hired, or if already hired, would be let go. Supposedly this was due to the horrendous sin of loving the wrong person. This practice was due to “protecting” the US government or major industry from losing valuable information which might be blackmailed from someone who would betry the government or their employer before admitting the realities of their private lives. Often times these employers themselves were adulterers and hypocrits.

I do not condone nor condemn alternate life styles. I do not condone or condemn those who have sexual relationships outside of marriage.

I cannot accept adultery in others because of my views on the sanctity of the marriage vows but that is just me. When an ex is guilty of numerous counts of adultery, it is easy to feel that way. Betrayal is a difficult emotion to handle. But that is how I view life and in reality, it is none of my business how others live their own lives.  I’m off my soap box. Namaste. Attic Annie


Comments Off on David Letterman had sex…what else is new?

Filed under Casual conversation, diary, general topics, musings, Uncategorized