What a mess Roseanne

flowerpower

Thu, May 31 2018, 2:51 pm

Squishy wrote:

There is definitely a double standard. Why shouldn't Bill Maher to be fired after he joked Trump is part orangutan?

Because "he is not my president" anyone is allowed to talk however this wish about Trump. 🤷🏼‍♀️

tryinghard

Thu, May 31 2018, 2:55 pm

It was really stupid. But to me, the double standard lies in knowing that someone else who had tweeted the same thing might have been suspended, fined, forced into mandatory sensitivity training. But I get the sense that they wanted to can the show anyways, so they took the opportunity.

Amarante

Thu, May 31 2018, 3:01 pm

Squishy wrote:

I understand the history of racism.

Calling Trump an oregatan is offensive because you can call a white person sub- human but not a black person.

It does not advance the cause of equality. Either something is wrong or it is not. Where is the line? Can you call a half black person a gorilla? How about a hexadecaroon? Can you call them a monkey?

And what if a Jew is really cheap? Are you unable to state this? What about the Japanese? They are notoriously tight fisted?

I'm not sure why you want to die on the bed of defending a clearly racist statement.

If you state a person (whatever their ethnic heritage) is cheap, that is a factual statement which is completely unlike all the other ethnic slurs that have been used to insult Jews as a race - there are lots of places non anti-Semites don't go about Jews as a people including describing them as being part of international banking rings or Shylocks. I was in a completely non-Jewish working environment and hated when people would talk about how "smart" Jews were - it gave me insight into how they really characterized people.

Calling a black woman an ape is not a description of a singular aspect of an individual.

And I am leaving out the whole history of ascribing ape-like characteristics to people of color. If you use such language to describe a group of people, you are a racist if you se to accept the cultural and historical context in which it is used.

Compare a woman to an ape and you will be thought of by non-racists as racist just as using "[crazy]" will make people think you are someone who lacks any kind of filter or sensitivity.

Amarante

Thu, May 31 2018, 3:04 pm

tryinghard wrote:

FWIW, this was ABC's Number One show and they had promoted it extensively on the upfronts in terms of selling advertising at high rates.

As a financial decision, they did NOT want to can a highly rated show they picked up. Cancelling means paying out a lot of money to actors and others who have pay or play contracts.

To the extent they wanted to cancel the show, it was not a pretext to cancel a poorly rated money losing show, but because the show reflected horribly on ABC and Disney in terms of supporting a racist.

SixOfWands

Thu, May 31 2018, 3:19 pm

flowerpower wrote:

Because "he is not my president" anyone is allowed to talk however this wish about Trump. 🤷🏼‍♀️

Trump refers to his adversaries using offensive nicknames like

Crazy Joe Biden, Gov. Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown, Low Energy Jeb, Crooked Hilary, Slippery James Comey, Lyin' Ted, Jeff Flakey, Cheatin' Obama, Pocahonta, and Little Marco.

He attempts to delegitimize the media with nicknames like

Failing New York Times, Deface The Nation, Very Fake News, and Dishonest Press.

He's hardly in a position to complain when someone makes a comment about him.

Except, wait. He DID. He sued Maher (note that the comment was made in 2013, well before Trump was a candidate). And his attorney was ... Michael Cohen!

In any case, if Maher should have been fired (in 2013) for his comment about Trump, should Trump be forced out of office for his comments?

allthingsblue

Thu, May 31 2018, 3:30 pm

All I can say is look at Roseanne's non-apology compared to Samantha Bee's apology.

SixOfWands

Thu, May 31 2018, 3:49 pm

allthingsblue wrote:

All I can say is look at Roseanne's non-apology compared to Samantha Bee's apology.

The apology is barely relevant, though.

Bee used a misogynistic, offensive term, and should be called to task for it.

But she did so in connection with legitimate political commentary on the tin ear of posting a photo of a mother and child, in light of the news about separating undocumented children from their parents. Remember that Ivanka has an official position in the White House, and acts on behalf of the government. She's not just a "daughter," she's an official. Unlike Sasha and Malia Obama. Or even Tiffany Trump.

33055

Thu, May 31 2018, 4:07 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

Her show should be canceled. It is a continuing double standard. Her comments followed the report that the government "lost track" of 1500 migrant children. This story is as distorted as the Obama era pictures of the kids in cages being attributed to Republicans.

WDEF
Home US & World News National News
US & WORLD NEWSNATIONAL NEWS
DID THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REALLY LOSE TRACK OF IMMIGRANT CHILDREN?
By CBS News - May 29, 20180

In recent days, multiple news outlets have reported the federal government lost track of nearly 1,500 immigrant children placed with sponsors, based on congressional testimony last month from a top Health and Human Services official, eliciting concern.

“The U.S. lost track of 1,475 immigrant children last year. Here’s why people are outraged now,” the Washington Post headline read this week. “Some 1,500 immigrant children unaccounted for, federal official says,” Fox News reported in its own recent headline. The New York Times’ Ron Nixon reported the story first, on April 26, with the headline, “Federal agencies lost track of nearly 1,500 migrant children placed with sponsors.

Those stories and others were based on remarks made by Health and Human Services Acting Assistant Secretary Steven Wagner in a Senate hearing on April 26 before a Senate Homeland Security subcommittee. Wagner testified that the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the HHS office responsible for unaccompanied immigrant minors or UACs, as the government calls them, “was unable to determine with certainty the whereabouts of 1,475” immigrant children the federal government had placed with sponsors. “Unaccompanied alien children,” or UACs, as the government officially describes them, are often placed with family members already living in the U.S.

“From October to December 2017, ORR attempted to reach 7,635 UAC and their sponsors,” Wagner said in his written testimony last month. “Of this number, ORR reached and received agreement to participate in the safety of well-being call from approximately 86 percent of sponsors. From these calls, ORR learned that 6,075 UAC remained with their sponsors. Twenty-eight UAC had run away, five had been removed from the United States, and 52 had relocated to live with a non-sponsor. ORR was unable to determine with certainty the whereabouts of 1,475 UAC.”

Wagner also clarified in his testimony that it is “HHS’ long-standing interpretation of the law that ORR is not legally responsible for children after they are released from ORR care.” But HHS is “exploring the question of ORR”s responsibilities in relation to children who are released to sponsors, and whether the level of responsibility would differ depending on the child’s relationship to his or her sponsor.”

So, did the federal government lose track of nearly 1,500 unaccompanied immigrant minors?

The children might not necessarily be lost, HHS Deputy Secretary Eric Hargan said in a lengthy statement Tuesday calling claims that the children are “lost,” “completely false.” ORR just has simply been unable to reach the sponsors in a follow-up call 30 days after placing the children with the sponsor, he said. Hargan said some of the sponsors may not be picking up the phone because they are not in the country legally.

“These children are not ‘lost;’ their sponsors—who are usually parents or family members and in all cases have been vetted for criminality and ability to provide for them—simply did not respond or could not be reached when this voluntary call was made,” Hargan’s statement said. “While there are many possible reasons for this, in many cases sponsors cannot be reached because they themselves are illegal aliens and do not want to be reached by federal authorities. This is the core of this issue: In many cases, HHS has been put in the position of placing illegal aliens with the individuals who helped arrange for them to enter the country illegally. This makes the immediate crisis worse and creates a perverse incentive for further violation of federal immigration law.”

33055

Thu, May 31 2018, 4:10 pm

Amarante wrote:

I am hardly defending any racist statement. I am saying stop saying it is ok to call whites orangutans or C U next Tuesdays. It isn't ok for anyone to do that. But apply equal punishments.

simcha2

Thu, May 31 2018, 4:56 pm

Squishy wrote:

I am hardly defending any racist statement. I am saying stop saying it is ok to call whites orangutans or C U next Tuesdays. It isn't ok for anyone to do that. But apply equal punishments.

So you're saying we should have civil discourse and anyone who uses offensive epithets and insults should be punished?

33055

Thu, May 31 2018, 5:17 pm

simcha2 wrote:

So you're saying we should have civil discourse and anyone who uses offensive epithets and insults should be punished?

I am saying the punishments should be equal. Names not allowed to be applied to black people shouldn't earn a free pass when white people are labeled them. Imagine Michelle Obama being called a CU#$. An apology wouldn't suffice.

The double standards of the press and Hollywood are notorious. Kim Kardashian who met with President Trump on prison reform was mocked and ridiculed. The same didn't happen to Obama's celebrities.

Civil discourse needs to start with the left. We need a fair and unbiased press.

southernbubby

Thu, May 31 2018, 5:26 pm

Squishy wrote:

It is so frustrating that anyone wants a balanced view, they have to look at several news sources. The press sells out to whatever group the advertisers want to make money off of. I am sick of the left being against anyone who is religious and their coverage of Israel is total out and out lies.

It did bother me, however, that the Patriot news channel (RW) and RW websotes could not appreciate what Starbucks was trying to do and portrayed it as turning coffee shops into homeless shelters and places for drug deals. I felt that Starbucks had to address this issue and that maybe others will follow suit and it will be a less biased country as a result of it.

I also understand that ABC could not appear to be in favor of Roseanne's tweet and her apology was limp and did nothing to save the situation. I think that the country would be in an uproar had they not pulled the show. It would be hard to say that because she is funny and entertaining, that she has the right to say whatever she likes in public.

pause

Thu, May 31 2018, 5:38 pm

ABC wanted to cancel the show anyway and this was just a very good excuse.

simcha2

Thu, May 31 2018, 5:48 pm

Squishy wrote:

But it isn't the same to call a white person an ape. Pretending it is either racist or willfully blind. And you know the implication was different calling Trump an orangutan (and I'm not defending that either).

I am not defending calling ivana the c word. I also not defend making fun of disabled people or calling people who don't agree with me me liars, crazy, dopey or dumb.

So what words exactly have to get you equal punishment?

SixOfWands

Thu, May 31 2018, 5:51 pm

pause wrote:

ABC wanted to cancel the show anyway and this was just a very good excuse.

ABC has the absolute right to cancel any show it wants, for good reason, bad reason, or no reason.

Networks have stupidly cancelled shows, and other networks have picked them up. Or fired stars. Or done all kinds of things.

If they had wanted to cancel the show, they would have. The fact that it was renewed tells me that they liked all the buckaroonies they were making from it.

I didn't watch the reboot. I watched the original a few times, but never regularly. I do know that George Clooney used to be on it, but I'm guessing he wasn't in the reboot. I've no skin in the game.

33055

Thu, May 31 2018, 6:03 pm

simcha2 wrote:

Calling anyone simian is awful. It may be more dramatic and get more play to call a black person an ape because of historical context and the hysteria of the liberal press and leftist Hollywood, but it is offensive to call anyone an ape because of the historical context.

Trump was called an oregatan precisely because of those historical prejudices. It is disingenuous to pretend calling him an oregatan is equal to calling him some other animal. It was meant to dehumanize him. It was meant the same way slaves were compared to apes.

simcha2

Thu, May 31 2018, 6:17 pm

Squishy wrote:

Trump was called an oregatan precisely because of those historical prejudices. It is disingenuous to pretend calling him an oregatan is equal to calling him some other animal. It was meant to dehumanize him. It was meant the same way slaves were compared to apes.

No,Trump was called an orangutan as part of a comedy routine questioning his lineage as a parody of his questioning Obama's lineage. The line included reference to his hair color.

Nothing to do with leftists and everything to do with a rewriting of history.

33055

Thu, May 31 2018, 6:23 pm

simcha2 wrote:

Do you really believe this???

The parody could have compared him to lots of other animals. He was compared to the orangutan to show he was the "ape" rather than the black man. Come on. Don't pretend this bit would have worked if he was compared to say a lion. The orangutan was not a coincidence.

shiaeisen

Thu, May 31 2018, 6:30 pm

dvorak613 wrote:

Word is ABC is going to try and make a spinoff series so that the rest of the cast and crew can keep their jobs at least as far they're currently contracted.

The show will be nothing without her,

simcha2

Thu, May 31 2018, 6:31 pm

Squishy wrote:

Yes, because the orangutan is orange! His hair color is similar. It wasn't a coincidence. I'm not saying it was right, or nice, but it wasn't the same.

I'm done with this. You can parrot Fox news all you like, but it doesn't make it true. There is both news and fake news on both sides of the political divide.

Despite all evidence you can't consider a different side. So there is no point trying to have a conversation.

And I have to make dinner.

Have a good evening.