Yesterday I watched the recent interview Matt Lauer did with Sarah Palin. The hot topic of the interview, after a quick debate about a gas line from Alaska, was the recent controversy involving David Letterman making a perverted comment about Palin's 14-year-old daughter on his late show. Letterman had the nerve to insult Palin's daughter, Willow, who attended a Yankee baseball game by commenting, "One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game, during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.”
I appreciate Sarah Palin's boldness in confronting Letterman through formal statements and during the interview with Lauer, who obviously has some motivation for standing up for Letterman.
During the interview, Lauer challenged Palin's rebuttal of Letterman by dismissing her opinion that attitudes such as Letterman's are destructive to young women in general and asserted that Palin needed to apologize for formally insinuating that Willow Palin would be in harm's way by associating with David Letterman. His question was this: "Is that not perhaps in bad taste...if you're suggesting that a 62-year-old man couldn't be trusted...?" If I had a chance to answer the question for Sarah Palin, this would be my answer: "To make the statements he does, including the one about my daughter [not to mention the "slutty flight attendant" comment he made about me] obviously he's a perverted, sexually obsessed old man. Would I ever want that influence or around my daughter? No thanks." Instead, Palin backed down more way than she should have by offering a few soft explanations for what the statement "It would be wise to keep Willow away from David Letterman" meant. People like David Letterman need to be taken head on. Over his years as the Late Show host, he's given no reason for anyone with a sense of morality to think that he's not a pervert who can't be trusted with any female, so why not label him for what he really is?