The Huffington Post thought it necessary to publish the following:
After widespread allegations that Ashton Kutcher strayed from his six-year marriage to Demi Moore, his alleged temptress, Sara Leal, is speaking out to Us Weekly, saying that she and Kutcher did have unprotected sex. Leal claims that she slept with Kutcher on September 24th after a night of partying — including a naked hot tub jaunt — in the actor’s Hard Rock hotel suite in San Diego.
Is there any public interest in this? OK, I should rephrase that: Is whatever public interest in the tawdry lives of celebrities necessarily something that the media should enable?
“Widespread allegations” that Kutcher cheated on his wife? Is this Iran Contra? Is Kutcher going to have to suspend taping of “Two and a Half Men” to testify before a Senate subcommittee? Why does anyone need to know about this?
Although Kutcher has not outright denied a relationship with Leal, he has taken to twitter to urge the public and his fans to not put any weight into the things that they read as well as to continue to support his wife via the 140 characters or less venue.
The latest? Kutcher tweeted a link to a pair of cufflinks with the abbreviated words “Cntrl” and “Esc” on them writing, “if we are not looking for one we are looking for the other Ctrl Esc.” Could this be Kutcher’s way of saying he lost control and now cannot escape or might it be his wishful thinking that he can control or escape the media?
Really? So-called journalists are now deciphering a TV star’s tweets as if they are complex passages from James Joyce?
I noticed that HuffPost offers readers the chance to “contribute to the story” — send in corrections and tips. I know unemployment is high but should people really spend their free time serving as unpaid and mostly unreliable Deep Throats? Do I at least get college credit? Sure, it would probably be community college credit, as it’s meaningless celebrity gossip, but what if I write an especially compelling essay explicating Kutcher’s tweets from his gothic period?
serhasacomplaint 
How do you spell (and define) “bimbo”?…
Jon Huntsman is officially off my Christmas Card list.
Commenting on Herman Cain’s calvacade of scandals, the presidential candidate (yeah, really, he’s still in the race) told the Boston Herald that “We’ve got real issues to talk about, not the latest bimbo eruption.”
What the hell is that?
Here’s a real issue, for you, Mr. Huntsman: Why don’t we discuss the casual disregard for women you display by throwing around the word “bimbo” like you’re someone’s 90-year-old grandmother using the word “colored.” “Oh, what? They don’t like to be called that anymore? It’s so hard to keep up. I liked that Nat King Cole, though. He was a good one.”
Checking the dictionary, “bimbo” is defined as “a generalized term of disapproval especially for an attractive but vacuous person” or, more offensively, a “tramp.”
So, who are these bimbos erupting from Cain’s now practically dormant volcano?
Sorry, Jon, no bimbos there, either.
The Huffington Post kindly provided a slideshow of Cain’s accusers. First up is Karen Kraushaar, a Treasury Department spokeswoman, who “was an employee at the National Restaurant Association during the time Cain was head of the group.” OK, nothing particularly bimboic about that. The second woman remains anonymous — The Huffington Post curiously chose to depict her using the image of what appears to be a thinly disguised Portia de Rossi — but we do know she that she also worked at the National Restaurant Association and is currently employed at a New Jersey lobbying firm. No bimbo readings there.
We know little about the third accuser, other than her having worked at the National Restaurant Association and charging Cain “with making sexually suggestive remarks and gestures, even inviting her to his corporate apartment for a private visit. She described his behavior as aggressive and inappropriate, similar to the claims made by the previous accusers.” I tend to err on “innocent until proven bimbo” so let’s move on to the fourth woman, Sharon Bialek, a professional woman and mother, who was the first to make a public statement and whose treatment by Cain’s camp and the conservative media arguably initiated the trickle-down creepiness that led Ginger White to come forward this week.
It’s possible Huntsman was confused by the smear job the Cain people put out on these women, which attempted to paint them as modern-day Evelyn Nesbits. Maybe he was just referring to Ginger White, the only one of the party of five to state that a consensual sexual relationship took place, rather than sexual harassment and sexual assault. It might be a little judgmental to call an Atlanta businesswoman a “bimbo” just because she had an extramarital affair, but I’m sure that’s the same pejorative used for Congressmen who troll for women on the Internet or who dress up in tiger suits when not fooling around with the teenage daughter of campaign donors. What? No? Well, that’s peculiar.
Huntsman is not even capable of original insults. “Bimbo eruption” dates back to the 1992 presidential campaign when political consultant Betsey Wright used it to describe the inconvenient women with whom Bill Clinton most likely had sex. I’m sure Ms. Wright is awfully proud of the mark she’s made in history and for women’s rights.
Sorry, Jon, I tried to find these “bimbos” for you but no luck. If it’s any consolation, I do know where to find a big jerk.
Posted by Stephen Robinson on November 30, 2011 in Political Theatre, Social Commentary
Tags: bimbo eruption, Boston Herald, Herman Cain, Huffington Post, Jon Huntsman