Reader comments
Isn't all this controversy fun?

I've always liked you, Scott. The problem I had with your piece is that you accused Rush Limbaugh of saying something he didn't actually say. You can check for yourself in the actual transcript and see that the widely circulated false account invented by Molly Ivins is only loosely based on what Rush actually said. He never called Chelsea the "White House Dog."

Since honestly is important, as you point out in this column, I hope you will issue a correction. Please let me know if you read this. I will gladly provide more info if necessary.

All the best,

Ryan

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Yours just happens to be paid for. Although I didn't like the so-called "joke" that Letterman told - which to me as a woman felt rather derogatory - I didn't appreciate Palin's "high-fluting" response either. She should not have tried to be so "eloquent". It got too muddled.

Funny thing about all of this - A-Rod didn't initially say a peep. With his tarnished reputation, what was his take? Not much has been written about his response, but I bet it hasn't felt good either.

If you are in the public eye - you will get publicity, good or bad. It just goes with the territory.

Ryan,

While Rush Limbaugh did not call Chelsea the "White House Dog" in words, he did mention that there was a new White House dog moving in and a picture of Chelsea was put up in the background. To me, it is funny how those who defend Limbaugh for the picture of Chelsea because he never actually said she was the White House dog are typically the same ones that insist that Letterman "obviously" meant the joke to be about the 14-year old daughter even though Letterman never said which daughter.

Either way, the event did happen just like with Letterman; both claimed a mistake (Letterman about which daughter went to the baseball game and Limbaugh about the picture) and both apologized.

An article responding to internet commentators is stoopid. You get paid for this? must be nice.

*yawn*

The two points of Letterman vs. Limbaugh are definitely equal.

Calling Chelsea a dog and insinuating a 14 year old was raped.

Ya, no difference--that is I guess if you are liberal anyways since they seem to be the one trying to equate them somehow.

Rushs joke about Chelsea was about as funny as anything Letterman has ever come up with anyhow.

Unfortunately for Letterman though, politically speaking, he could not argue his way out of wet paper bag. He really makes himself look bad when he has guests on like Bill O'Reilly and Letterman has to totally talk over Bill in attempt to obscure the verbal embarrassment he is suffering.

Letterman is getting old and sour.

Scott: I think your intentions and motivations in writing your opinion in the first were disgusting and premeditated. You knew how the readers would react to your comments. You flatly wrote what you did to inflame passions and wicked contention. You did all this for your own aggrandizement bringing you into the limelight of useless contention and controversy. Yup!!! You got what you wished for. May I ask, "Is this world a better place because of your opinion piece?" I think not. Shame on you as a human being with gifts and talents that could be used to lift and urge the human soul to search for higher ground. You chose the downward side free speech. It matters not what your politics are, but your article sadly reveals your tainted and sadly corrupted soul and character. Then you come back with an article saying "how much fun you are having." Shame on you. Shame on you Scott! Shame on you Scott! Shame on you Scott!

Hopefully all of Scott's commenters weren't from the Internet. Otherwise, our stereotyping will have to go down another notch for the one who threatened to cancel his subscription.

A bit of advise. Stick to commentary about TV and leave the politics to the pros.

natty: any article that makes me laugh, is a good article. I mean, it's in the 'entertainment' section, you think discussion of internet comments is too high brow for that?

ChainSawHarry: the world is a better place because I enjoyed both articles. The first one expressed my own opinions better than myself. The latter made me laugh. What more could one want?

re: CSH at 11:01

yikes you scare me. I can just picture you sitting in your trailor stock piling ammo. I'm not sure what world you live in, but it's time to check into a "wellness hotel."

I'm surprised that nobody has brought this up yet - but I'm disgusted that Palin was in New York... she is supposed to be keeping her eye on Russia!!! who was watching them while she was accross the country shopping?? it's just horrible - who knows what Russia did while she was gone.

This article shows how some males can be rotten lowlifes in bashing young girls.

He does not have a clue, if someone has a way of sending NOW's response by putting Letterman in their Hall of shame he might get a clue. Liberals deny that they are liberals all the time in the medica, why should he be different.

" But he told a joke about raping a 14-year-old! No, he didn't. You can argue semantics all you want, but it never happened."

One doesn't have to argue semantics; all one has to do is listen to the joke.

Letterman did, indeed, tell a joke about raping a 14-year-old girl. Sarah Palin's 14-year-old daughter accompanied her to New York, and the jokes were about the girl who accompanied her to New York, and no one else.

And that, Scott, cannot be defended.

I'm completely at a loss for words (at least socially acceptable words) when it comes to addressing the blatantly closed-minded and ignorant attitudes that have been presented by so many readers.

It's really a shame the majority of you waste your time/income on a newspaper. It seems that your minds are already completely made up. Just to put your minds at ease, YES there is a liberal conspiracy to steal your guns, religion, and eventually souls (INSERT SARCASM HERE!!!).

@ChainSawHarry: GROW UP. The role of an opinion writer is to offer personal insight in the hopes of initiating dialogue. Put your tar and feathers away please.

@I See: Yes, they are differences between what Limbaugh and Letterman said. Letterman told a joke he publicly apologized for. Limbaugh referred to Chelsea Clinton using a word that, according to etymologist Francis Grose, "the most offensive appellation that can be given to a woman, even more provoking than that of whore." Has Limbaugh apologized yet? He was probably too far lost in an OxyContin-abusing haze to remember what he said...

I guess should be able to make whatever crude jokes he wants about Sarah Palin and her daughter without any repercussions, but anyone who critizises him or Scott D. Pierce should be ashamed of themselves for narrow-mindedness.

Here's a thought. Ignore the comments.

It just seems a bit narcissistic to comment upon comments about your comments. Anyone can stir up venom on pretty much any topic. And due to the nature of the commentboard here, anyone can post anything they wish here. You assume that the folks who post here, mean what they say, but most of them probably are just bored. Or they had a bad day or whatever.

So again... ignore the comments...

(Including this one. :-D )

Much ado about nothing. Letterman messed up and apologized. Palin, as usual, went for the publicity. Contacting Letterman, asking for an explanation and apology would have sufficed. But Caribou Barbie always goes for the stage, apparently not realizing what a parody she makes of herself.

is a fine "old dog" on the networks who should not be watched just out of better choices. He is all washed up and seeks attention by making snide remards about other peoples oung daughters. About watching Russia, Sarah Palin throuws that out as a joke of courtse...however, if Russia needs wastching I would welcome her savy. Shwe gets much of her training in real life vs. our present corps.

Who can really tell what comments are serious and which are not? I think you're making a big deal about nothing. Heck, I've been guilty of getting on these boards and debating myself. I will give one opinion and then give an opposing one, just because this place is the embodiment of chaos.

Buwahahahaha!