Howard Stern on Whoopi Goldberg

Whoopi Goldberg ** Hollywood’s official apologist-in-chief for bad behavior?

Let’s start with a disclaimer: I have been a huge fan of Howard Stern for many years.

Howard Stern at the mic. Photo: Sirius XM

He, Robin and the gang have made me laugh many a morning. But in between the laughs, the fantastic celebrity interviews, and the commentary on politics and current events, he’ll state a valid opinion on something and today it was Whoopi Goldberg’s series of defenses made for some Hollywood stars currently and formerly in the news for their bad behavior.

During the short retrospective, Howard made the point that he is so disliked by many in Hollywood that if he got into a mess, Whoopi wouldn’t step up and defend him as she has done for others on The View. “I want this kind of defense if I run into trouble,” he said.

In order, he ran tape of her defending: Mel Gibson (girlfriend and child custody problems), Roman Polanski (statutory rape), Michael Vick (dog fighting), Christian Bale (rage on a movie set), Jesse James (cheating resulting in divorce from Sandra Bullock), and Ted Danson (blackface stunt at the Friar’s Club).

Listening to all these tapes back-to-back, it is apparent that she is quite the apologist and, more importantly, feels that there is nothing wrong with these offensive antics or criminal acts if they are committed by someone famous that (a) she has a working or personal relationship with or (b) who commits an act that she herself has done or had a hand in.

Under these theories, I can’t imagine what her motivation to defend Michael Vick is but she sympathized with Jesse James’ since she cheated while in a relationship and could understand his actions.

As for the others, I understand her defense of them: there’s potential for employment with them and entertainment is an industry built on relationships. Whoopi also mentioned that Mel Gibson was a personal friend. Personally, I’d have to re-evaluate that friendship after the “pack of nig**s” comment.

The worst defense and most inexcusable of them all was the Roman Polanski defense. She insisted that the drugged rape of a 13-year-old child wasn’t, as she put it, “rape rape.” My guess is if this were her child, she wouldn’t be so charitable in her opinion. (FYI Whoopi—the age of consent for sexual relations in California is 18 for both sexes.) Howard posed the question again this morning as he has before regarding Polanski: “How do you defend Roman Polanski saying it wasn’t rape rape?”

Stern ended the segment by pointing out an upside to this: she didn’t defend O.J. Simpson—or at least there wasn’t tape of it.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s