Deseret News | Isn't all this controversy fun?

Reader comments
Isn't all this controversy fun?

Page:
1
2
Next >

Ryan | 7:46 p.m. June 22, 2009

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

Entitlement | 8:33 p.m. June 22, 2009

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.

mogelijk | 2:05 a.m. June 23, 2009

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.

Comments continue below

natty | 10:21 a.m. June 23, 2009

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

Anonymous | 10:33 a.m. June 23, 2009

*yawn*

I see | 10:46 a.m. June 23, 2009

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.

ChainSawHarry | 11:01 a.m. June 23, 2009

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!

@ natty | 11:12 a.m. June 23, 2009

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.

Mike | 11:14 a.m. June 23, 2009

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

Dave Van Tassell | 11:15 a.m. June 23, 2009

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?

really? | 11:21 a.m. June 23, 2009

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.

Jealousy | 11:21 a.m. June 23, 2009

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

leave the poor guy alone | 11:41 a.m. June 23, 2009

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.

Robert | 11:44 a.m. June 23, 2009

" 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.

Will | 11:47 a.m. June 23, 2009

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...

Andrew C | 11:48 a.m. June 23, 2009

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.

Look at me! Look at Me! | 11:56 a.m. June 23, 2009

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 )

Granny | 11:56 a.m. June 23, 2009

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.

Letterman | 11:57 a.m. June 23, 2009

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.

Unhealthy Debate | 11:59 a.m. June 23, 2009

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!

Evets | 12:01 p.m. June 23, 2009

There is no politics here. It is plain and simple, you wrote an opinion piece praiseing Letterman's shameful remarks about women. When we put down the other sex, especially the way Letterman did, it is not funny. It is disgusting. When you defend such behavior it is equally disgusting. The recipient of the joke could of been man or woman, liberal or conservative, and it would be equally disgusting. Scott you can do better than this.

I'll delve into politics | 12:30 p.m. June 23, 2009

those that responsed with the name calling, etc are upset that Palin mis stepped, and can't go back. This is the quality of HER supporters, and if this is the quality of voters we have in the GOP, I'll vote elsewhere until they go. We should have a right within our party, to have this discussion of If Palin is presidential or not. The name calling - that tells me all I need to know about those that support her. I also feel that most of those vile e-mails and responses came from outside Utah. At Least, I hope so.

STEVE-O | 12:36 p.m. June 23, 2009

ChainSawHarry

You rebuke Scott, then go on a negative tirade yourself? You've contradicted yourself. You're trying to stir up emotion and attention exactly the way you claim Scott did. Shame on YOU!!

Lighten Up | 1:10 p.m. June 23, 2009

I think everyone needs to relax and take the column for what it was: an opinion. Our society has become so polarized and ultra-sensitive.

Desert Dawg | 1:31 p.m. June 23, 2009

Lighten Up...AMEN! AGREED! We should be grateful we as a people can express our opinions...whether we like what others say or not. I may or may not agree with you Scott but we all have the right to express our opinions, even if you do get paid for it (insert jealousy HERE).

Anonymous | 1:32 p.m. June 23, 2009

So this clears it all up and makes everything you said in the column alright then? You don't get it Scott. It's your opinion, but it's a rotten opinion.

Chadders | 1:35 p.m. June 23, 2009

How is this a big deal? Did anyone watching actually believe Letterman was talking about A-Rod with the 14 year? To me it seemed obvious he was talking about the one that already has been knocked up. Palin is making the RNP look worse and worse. Great choice McCain, lol

slwatch | 1:40 p.m. June 23, 2009

Letterman is funny...Rush is still fat... You are doing a great job Scott... makes me think the D-News actually cares about showing two sides to issues... what is the world coming to...

Frustrated in WA | 1:51 p.m. June 23, 2009

Sarah Palin's daughter is not fair game for anyone. She had a baby by her boy friend and did not abort it. She is not a prostitute, she made wrong choices. And NO jokes about prostitutes are not funny either nor appropriate for TV either.

Michelle | 1:58 p.m. June 23, 2009

I agree with the person that wrote this article. Everyone is so sensitive these days that they jump to conclusions when a simple joke is made. David Letterman meant no harm. He made a funny observation that had nothing to do with a 14 yr old or 'young women in general.' I think it makes Sarah Palin look like an idiot. Although, she doesn't need much help doing that.

Why I miss SoCal | 2:37 p.m. June 23, 2009

People in UT have nothing better to do than criticize an opinion column in the Desnews. It's pathetic. What's even more pathetic is that I'm criticizing people that criticize opinion writers.

I miss Newport Beach. People aren't so uptight when they cool off at the beach once a week. Sighs.

Extremes | 2:46 p.m. June 23, 2009

I also think the extreme responses on newspaper comment boards are sometimes amusing and usually should be disregarded. However, it would have been much more informative for you to address the substantive criticisms to your article. It is easy to laugh at the extremes as if no one could possibly have a legitimate disagreement with you argument. I thought there were also several legitimate criticisms of your bias in that particular article and the general double standard that is used when writing anything about Sarah Palin. I'm not a huge Palin fan, but to claim her defense of her daughter was pure political opportunism is naive and typical of most media types. I generally like your columns though.

blah blah | 2:48 p.m. June 23, 2009

I dont quite understand why many of you do not subscribe to the philosophy that reasonable people can disagree. Is it a conservative thing? Religious thing? Mormon thing? You cant learn anything from Pierce's character because of the opinion he expressed in these articles. They are opinions. I've disagreed with Pierce more often than agreed with him but I make no personal judgments upon him for a freaking opinion. I do know that because I read his column he in fact succeeded in his job as a columnist. That and his take on things is relatively unpredictable. Hes actually convinced me that hes pretty even handed. But enough of me, please continue with blindly insisting that your right and anybody that disagrees is with you has evil intent. Go ahead. Im imagining that classic utah accent when im reading the posts. You know the one. The one that turns the word garbage to garbeege or tuesday to tuesdee.

Wow | 2:50 p.m. June 23, 2009

A lot of people that comment on this site really don't like to be challenged do they?

Adam | 2:51 p.m. June 23, 2009

Done with the Trib. It will be Deseret News from now on. Been a Trib subscriber for 23 years. You have proven to me how far left the paper has become. What an idiot you are. Hope your daughter is put in this situation one of these days and we will see how you respond. It all fun and games until it is directed to your daughter.

Naruto | 2:51 p.m. June 23, 2009

Ha, Ha, Ha, Way to go, you tell 'em!

lynn | 3:19 p.m. June 23, 2009

what is sad is that we live in a world where comments such as Letterman's are considered by some to be entertainment - the "high road" seems to be a single lane anymore and a small one at that-

T Smith | 3:34 p.m. June 23, 2009

"...My political views don't matter here. And they weren't expressed..."

Impossible. Commentators like you express their political views with every commentary, whether they realize it or not. Your political views are especially easy to determine.

I have less issues with Letterman's jokes than I do with the bias and political commentary undergirding them. If he pokes fun at Obama, it's invariably in a light-hearted and repectful way that makes our President even the more endearing to us -- when he pokes fun at Palin, it's in an extremely disrespectful way, aimed nothing short than at character assination, be it consciously or subconsciouly contrived. It's blantant and it's wrong. If Letterman wants a political show opposite the right, he should just resign and get one. I'm sure with his clout he could give Limbaugh et. al a run for their money.

Annoying Debate | 3:38 p.m. June 23, 2009

Letterman was out of line and careless with his joke writing. I don't think he ever meant to imply the younger daughter and his apology (while at least a couple of days too late) seemed appropriate to me under the circumstances. In the end he didn't make excuses and seemed sincere. As for Palin, any surprise that she is trying to milk it for all it's worth demonstrates a troubling naivety about the nature of politicians. I don't think either party has taken the moral high road but what do you expect from a late night show host and a politician?

SLMG | 3:48 p.m. June 23, 2009

Scott, Keep up the good work, I don't always have to agree with you to enjoy your column. In this case I did and do agree with you, Sarah Palin will put herself on the national stage any time she can and use her children to do it regardless of the cost to them.
I actually read Deseret News for the comments just for a mornings entertainment. Talk about varied opinions.

Much Ado About Nothing | 3:57 p.m. June 23, 2009

NEWS FLASH: Anyone,and I mean ANYONE, still arguing about this flat-out isn't listening to reason and common sense.

Folks--Letterman admitted the joke was in poor taste and explained what he meant--Bristol, not Willow! Only the closed-minded among you (sorry, Chainsaw Harry, Robert, and pals, you've revealed yourselves) insist they know what Letterman meant better than he did.

Pierce dared voice his opinion, which I agree with--he's the media expert, and as a former journalist, I believe his opinions are usually spot-on. People, we're free to speak our minds in America--at least until some of you who can't stand to hear what contradicts your politics/prejudices take over.

Also, "natty" and others: Pierce also has every right to respond to unfair criticism from people who insist on misreading plain English. Maybe you all should admit YOU are driving any further comment on this story?

You people are truly embarrassing yourselves. Nothing significant happened here. MOVE ON.

Don't Care | 4:07 p.m. June 23, 2009

I really don't care what daughter he meant to joke about. His joke was an example of the vulgarity and crudeness of society. Hooray! Lets defend that!

Two can play | 4:40 p.m. June 23, 2009

Thank goodness that the joke was in poor taste enough to distract from the fact that Palin is building her career on the backs of her daughters. Exploiting children to further carrears. Hooray! Lets defend that!

Scott, you're a typical liberal | 4:46 p.m. June 23, 2009

here is a question for you Scott - had RUSH LIMBAUGH made a similar comment about Hilary Clinton and her daughter or Michele Obama and her daughters would you have written the same things suggesting that Hilary and Michele deserved it and its all in good fun? NO, I DON'T THINK SO!!!! You would have been crying for Rush's head on a platter and you know it! You would have been accusing Rush of all sort of despicable things and rightly so. So Scott, why don't you write an article about the DOUBLE STANDARD that exists between liberals and conservatives and the national media. I won't hold my breath!!

Ethan | 4:50 p.m. June 23, 2009

And there are STILL tons of jerks posting their even more inflamatory responses. What a bunch of hypocrites.

Your retort was well-written, Scott. Those who continue to get so upset about it need to realize that the world is full of people who disagree. Get used to it! Many of these people are those who claim to be open-minded and accepting of those who differ from them, but in reality they are completely full of you know what.

Jpjazz | 4:58 p.m. June 23, 2009

I was one who was riled by the column and now feel a little foolish to have been drawn into the fray.

Most of what is written and/or broadcast by the various media including this one is intended to pull readership and ultimately advertisers.

Foolishly, I had grown to apply a higher trust to the reviews of Mr Pierce. Now embarrassed, I understand the folly in such trust

re:Two can play | 5:22 p.m. June 23, 2009

what are you talking about Palin exploiting her daughters? Exactly how has Palin done that? Please explain. Oh I see, by bringing her family on the stage with her during the campaign. I guess Michele Obama didn't do that right??? Plain didn't exploit ANYONE!!! The liberal media went after Palin's daughter like fly's on stink and Governor Palin had nothing to do with it. Palin didn't ask the media to report on her daughter nor did she advertise it - she did ask that her family privacy be respected and the liberal media circled around her like the vultures they are. Get a clue guy!!!

Croc | 5:29 p.m. June 23, 2009

Awesome articles! I hope to keep reading your articles for a long long while.

s | 5:35 p.m. June 23, 2009

Letterman told a dumb joke. Lots of people tell jokes and a lot of those jokes really aren't funny. It really doesn't matter which daughter Letterman was refering to. Yes, Bristol committed a transgression in sleeping with her boyfriend and getting pregnant. Plenty of folks make mistakes in their life. Does this mean then they have to be the butt of peoples jokes forever afterwards or is there a chance they can learn from their experience and move forward? Maybe that's the part that was so offensive in the first place, I don't know.

Dear Granny | 5:45 p.m. June 23, 2009

No respectable parent whose child was the subject of a sick SEX joke, would allow that to stand without a response. You suggest the response should have been done privately. However, since the joke was made PUBLICLY, the demand for an apology had to be made PUBLICLY, not for publicity's sake, but OUT OF RESPECT AND AS A SHOW OF SUPPORT FOR HER DAUGHTER. AGAIN, no respectable parent allows their child to be used publicly in a such a sick, DISGUSTING way without responding PUBLICLY. How much respect do you think your child would have for you "granny" if they were publicly humiliated and you sat there stone-faced and stone cold? They might not say it, but any pedestal you may have been on, would be LONG GONE! (your anti-Palin stripes show well, being you missed this common sense approach to parenting). And, assuming you are female, what would you think of your husband if some drunk came up to you in a crowded restaurant and made a loud, obsene, disgusting comment about you, and your husband just sat there quietly stuffing his face? HE'D BE IN THE DOG HOUSE FOR LIFE!

Page:
1
2
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.