Letterman is one of the very few who seems to have learned an old lesson.

"The coverup is worse than the crime."

I am not condoning what he did. Anytime "a boss" engages in an activity like that I wonder how truly consensual it was. Fear of losing a job may play a part.

However, compare his response to the Ensign response. Letterman is going to take his punishment right out front. I'll give him that.

's none of my business. This is between him and his wife. I agree that he was very smart to go to the cops and nail the extortionist.

People never learn though:
Martha Stewart
Marion Jones
Roger Clemens (probably. and he perjured himself in front of Congress)

I think the feds get really angry when you lie to them. They write your name in indelible ink somewhere. It may take a while, but they never give up.

Ensign is going to hopefully face something.

Republicans claim he did nothing wrong even though he was convicted of five felony counts of lying to the Grand Jury (Perjury)

I agree though, it is their business. Work place affairs and romances do happen. I met my husband when we were working together on a community project. And yes, he was married at the time but he and his then-wife were already talking to attorneys about a divorce at her request.

But, overall, what Letterman does, has done and will do in his personal life in the future doesn't affect my life. I'm a Letterman fan and will continue to remain one.

show.

very smart.

He certainly can't claim any moral high ground when a man in his position has sex with his own staffers. That is a huge workplace no-no and there's no way he wasn't fully aware of that.

He's clearly ashamed and embarrassed that this has come out, even if he's not ashamed or embarrassed about the acts themselves. He doesn't strike me as particularly proud of himself.

notice. amazing. :)

type to use his power to get laid.

Affairs in the work place is a common happening.

it completely ignores the issue.

affairs in the workplace is one thing.

affairs involving supervisors and subordinates is another thing entirely.

letterman's affairs fall in the latter category.

letterman literally had a "universe" of potential sex partners to choose from. choosing women who work for you was a very bad choice.

They are in a high stakes, high profile, extremely competitive environment. It's the easiest thing in the world to feel that nobody except someone sharing your exciting (and creative) enterprise would "understand" you, etc. As they say, "there's a broken heart for every light on Broadway."

who aren't SUBORDINATES to you.

i hate to use this example, but matalin and carville. two political pundits, but neither WORKS for the other.

also, fwiw, i am ALSO in a relatively insular profession, at least as distinctive as letterman.

we also tend to often date within our profession.

i'm all for that. just not people who work under you.

i gave the example of a sgt. who dated one of his subordinates (same span of control, etc.). that was unethical. although, they did end up getting married and are perfectly happy.

to do with power etc, but tremendous physical attraction. The affair started when I started working, ended within a few months, and I worked there for over seven years. We remained friends long after I left.

When you work closely with anyone, boss, employee or co-worker, it is possible to feel powerful physical attraction. In the case of Letterman's assistant, my educated guess is that she had creative input into the show. On that level, it can become equal footing and the emotions of creating together, along with physical attraction can transcend the "power" issue.

Is it right that it happened? I cannot judge. Stephanie has claimed that the affair ended before Letterman's son was born, 6 years ago. He did have a long term relationship with his now wife, but of course we are not privy to their arrangement.


As of now, no other women have come forward to describe their relationship with Letterman, so we have no idea where they came into the equation as to the positions they had with him (no pun intended!).

My former supervisor and I have been happily married for 18 years.

is an abuse of power are looking at it academically, or perhaps they were in a situation where there was abuse of power.

Dave Letterman has not been sued for harassment and if he didn't give into the blackmailer, I'm taking an educated guess that he wasn't blackmailed by his partners. I think they were adult, willing participants.

But I became annoyed after 3 years of Lewinski jokes, it just went on for too long.
I stopped watching for a few years. I’m watching now but never want to hear a Lewinski joke from him again, especially now.

and I'm a fan of Letterman's too

...that is the best rule I know of in situations like that. If they think they can take you once, they will come at you again. So deal with it ~~ just like Letterman did. Yes, what was the basis for the attempted extortion of Letterman was not a good thing ~~ but he dealt with it, confessed and took care of business. I have a hell of a lot more admiration for him than I do for a weak POS like Ensign who runs, hides, breaks the law, and gets Mommy and Dada to help him cover up that the man thinks only with his dick.

JMHO

Letterman is a huge celebrity who could possibly help anyone looking for a career in entertainment. I think it's just as likely that the women sought him out, rather than that he sought them out as you imply.

Even in a normal working environment, many people are attracted to the power of their bosses and go after them, men and women.

What you say is true. However, there could be some who may have been afraid to lose a job. I don't know, but it is a legitimate question. I don't mean to imply that all of them were.

or make a "love-connection" with the mailroom guy or the coffee go-fer.. An unmarried boss is THE target. Any woman who's single, probably imagines that SHE is "the one" to land the big one..

and imagine what it would be like to know certain of your coworkers were being treated differently, or might be being treated differently, from you because they are giving nookie to the boss.

It's a no-no in the workplace because it's discriminatory. Those who excuse him for it are just as bad as those who make excuses for (I hesitate to say it but it's true) Polanski. Not because it's rape or nonconsensual, which is the case with Polanski, but because it creates an unfair work environment, and I think some people are excusing Letterman merely because of who he IS and his position in life, whereas David Lewis-your-boss would be regarded with much ire if he were sleeping with one of your coworkers and giving her perks he didn't give you.

Then you have the "sex positive" crew, to which any kind of sex between anyone is OK so long as no one scares the horses (and if the horses get scared, well, they should cover their eyes, right?). Well, sex between people in power and the people they have power over is NOT OK. It creates a discriminatory work environment, and it's not right.

The good thing? At least Letterman is admitting it, and taking whatever results.

according to www.tmz.com

You are correct that it would create an unfair work environment and I'm sure CBS will now be looking into whether she received special financial perks or otherwise during this time period.

Even after 2003. I always had the sense he seemed a bit infatuated with her.

Not that I'm implying anything about special treatment or the consensual nature of things, just not surprised that it seems to be this particular gal.

but it does make a difference to me. At least, no crying wife and desolate kids...

She is apparently not overly bothered. I don't know why everyone assumes all relationships are the same.

but hey I'd be a hypocrite to judge-I'm polyamorous but haven't always been honest about it;)

cause that's when I watched most was probably from 1995-2004 or so and once I saw her picture and the name I remembered her.

She was on there quite a bit, like she would bring out prizes for people or be featured for whatever reason.

I don't remember thinking Dave seemed infatuated with her, but I do remember thinking they seemed REALLY flirty with each other. She even seemed star-struck just talking to him on TV even which would be odd if she were his assistant, to be star-struck by him still, but who knows the timeline of how it all played out.

Your point that sleeping with subordinates CAN create an unfair work environment is valid, and I agree that it almost always does. However, no one knows (or is not saying) that any of those women WERE treated any differently by anyone on the staff, or by Letterman himself. I find it remarkable that this had been going on for years, and no one ever raised a stink before the blackmail attempt. Either Letterman's company has an excellent PR department that really knows how to keep a lid on things (a good possibility, admittedly), or it WASN'T an unhappy work environment for any concerned.

Furthermore, if this was a problem for other co-workers, it's not unreasonable to think this would have bitten him in the ass long ago.

Like the Drew Barrymore thing? They've always been overly flirty as well. I think there were others and he would be one I could see actresses going for due to his respect and power in the industry.

That works, too. :)

He made it perfectly clear that he was not married, and even though his relationship was long-standing and with one person, they may have had an understanding. Regina has a cushy life, does not want for anything, so maybe she made her "bargain" long ago. If not, she would have left.

with her husband's business partner.

Just for the reason you mention. Her cards aren't all out on the table yet and SOMEONE out there has the evidence to nail her to the wall as well.

Substantiated innuendo is of course a very different animal.

but I get your point. He killed the gossip angle.

It will be interesting to see if he gets sued for sexual harassment, now that he has admitted the activity.

He's probably safe and clear.