Alaska and Pot

[millerx]

BIG DILEMMA: OPRAH BALKS AT HOSTING SARAH PALIN; STAFF DIVIDED

Fri Sep 05 2008 08:55:46 ET

 

Oprah Winfrey may have introduced Democrat Barack Obama to the women of America -- but the talkshow queen is not rushing to embrace the first woman on a Republican presidential ticket!

 

Oprah's staff is sharply divided on the merits of booking Sarah Palin, sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

 

"Half of her staff really wants Sarah Palin on," an insider explains. "Oprah's website is getting tons of requests to put her on, but Oprah and a couple of her top people are adamantly against it because of Obama."

 

One executive close to Winfrey is warning any Palin ban could ignite a dramatic backlash!

 

It is not clear if Oprah has softened her position after watching Palin's historic convention speech.

 

Last year, Winfrey blocked an appearance by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, timed to a promotional tour of his autobiography.

 

Oprah and executive producer Sheri Salata, who has contributed thousands of dollars to Obama's campaign, refused requests for comment.

 

I think this needs to be it's own NEW thread!

 

Just call it "Oprah and Pot..."

Edited September 5, 2008 by millerx

[detlef]

BIG DILEMMA: OPRAH BALKS AT HOSTING SARAH PALIN; STAFF DIVIDED

Fri Sep 05 2008 08:55:46 ET

 

Oprah Winfrey may have introduced Democrat Barack Obama to the women of America -- but the talkshow queen is not rushing to embrace the first woman on a Republican presidential ticket!

 

Oprah's staff is sharply divided on the merits of booking Sarah Palin, sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

 

"Half of her staff really wants Sarah Palin on," an insider explains. "Oprah's website is getting tons of requests to put her on, but Oprah and a couple of her top people are adamantly against it because of Obama."

 

One executive close to Winfrey is warning any Palin ban could ignite a dramatic backlash!

 

It is not clear if Oprah has softened her position after watching Palin's historic convention speech.

 

Last year, Winfrey blocked an appearance by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, timed to a promotional tour of his autobiography.

 

Oprah and executive producer Sheri Salata, who has contributed thousands of dollars to Obama's campaign, refused requests for comment.

 

So because she's a woman, Oprah has to have her on? Is that the implication? Maybe she's not into Palin's whole book banning deal in Alaska. Oprah is not a news show in case you didn't notice. It's a show where she gets to have on people that she digs. It wouldn't surprise me if Oprah doesn't dig Palin despite the fact that they're both women.

[whomper]

So because she's a woman, Oprah has to have her on? Is that the implication? Maybe she's not into Palin's whole book banning deal in Alaska. Oprah is not a news show in case you didn't notice. It's a show where she gets to have on people that she digs. It wouldn't surprise me if Oprah doesn't dig Palin despite the fact that they're both women.

 

 

If Obama was white do you think Oprah would be debating having Palin on ?

[millerx]

So because she's a woman, Oprah has to have her on? Is that the implication? Maybe she's not into Palin's whole book banning deal in Alaska. Oprah is not a news show in case you didn't notice. It's a show where she gets to have on people that she digs. It wouldn't surprise me if Oprah doesn't dig Palin despite the fact that they're both women.

I agree with your point. It is her show, with her name on it...she can pick and choose who she wants. I don't think that was the jist of the piece though.

 

People (and alot of women) have come to idolize Oprah for her seeming willingness to not be bound by traditional stereotypes, societal rules and/or constraints. She promotes herself as the "every man" (or in her case woman). She promotes herself as impartial, fair, and balanced. People seem to come to expect this of her.

 

She has every right to have on who she wants...she also has to suffer the consequences of not living up to what she has promoted herself to be.

[detlef]

If Obama was white do you think Oprah would be debating having Palin on ?

 

 

I agree with your point. It is her show, with her name on it...she can pick and choose who she wants. I don't think that was the jist of the piece though.

 

People (and alot of women) have come to idolize Oprah for her seeming willingness to not be bound by traditional stereotypes, societal rules and/or constraints. She promotes herself as the "every man" (or in her case woman). She promotes herself as impartial, fair, and balanced. People seem to come to expect this of her.

 

She has every right to have on who she wants...she also has to suffer the consequences of not living up to what she has promoted herself to be.

My point is that maybe neither Obama's race or Palin's sex has anything to do with this. She is obviously very much into what Obama's message is and maybe she really doesn't like what she's learned about Palin. That he's black or she's a woman doesn't need to matter. So, just because Palin is the first woman to be on the GOP ticket shouldn't mean she's an automatic for the show.

 

Honestly, I've watched Oprah about never, so I don't really know what kind of people she hosts. If she often or even sometimes has guests whose stances she's not into just to be fair to all sides than this would seem like a poor choice. Is that, in fact, the case?

 

However, if the show is about people she thinks are cool, then this makes perfect sense. My wife is as big a pro-woman's rights and advancement as anyone I know and she likes almost nothing about Palin. Just because she's a woman who might be VP doesn't mean that every woman needs to be down with her.

[whomper]

My point is that maybe neither Obama's race or Palin's sex has anything to do with this. She is obviously very much into what Obama's message is and maybe she really doesn't like what she's learned about Palin. That he's black or she's a woman doesn't need to matter. So, just because Palin is the first woman to be on the GOP ticket shouldn't mean she's an automatic for the show.

 

Honestly, I've watched Oprah about never, so I don't really know what kind of people she hosts. If she often or even sometimes has guests whose stances she's not into just to be fair to all sides than this would seem like a poor choice. Is that, in fact, the case?

 

However, if the show is about people she thinks are cool, then this makes perfect sense. My wife is as big a pro-woman's rights and advancement as anyone I know and she likes almost nothing about Palin. Just because she's a woman who might be VP doesn't mean that every woman needs to be down with her.

 

 

Miller pretty much nailed my thoughts on the subject.

[detlef]

Miller pretty much nailed my thoughts on the subject.

Again, does she often host people with political or social stances that she doesn't agree with? That's really the issue here. She didn't allow Thomas on the show and nobody should be remotely amazed at that. Even though, <<shocking>> dude is black.

[Bird Dog]

McCain's speech was a dribbler back to the mound. Same old McCain.

[Ursa Majoris]

Again, does she often host people with political or social stances that she doesn't agree with? That's really the issue here. She didn't allow Thomas on the show and nobody should be remotely amazed at that. Even though, <<shocking>> dude is black.

Does Fox? Surely if shows are funded privately / by advertising, they should be allowed to have on whoever they want. Just don't call it news. Oprah isn't a news show.

[millerx]

My point is that maybe neither Obama's race or Palin's sex has anything to do with this. She is obviously very much into what Obama's message is and maybe she really doesn't like what she's learned about Palin. That he's black or she's a woman doesn't need to matter. So, just because Palin is the first woman to be on the GOP ticket shouldn't mean she's an automatic for the show.

 

Honestly, I've watched Oprah about never, so I don't really know what kind of people she hosts. If she often or even sometimes has guests whose stances she's not into just to be fair to all sides than this would seem like a poor choice. Is that, in fact, the case?

 

However, if the show is about people she thinks are cool, then this makes perfect sense. My wife is as big a pro-woman's rights and advancement as anyone I know and she likes almost nothing about Palin. Just because she's a woman who might be VP doesn't mean that every woman needs to be down with her.

Once again, I agree with you " Just because she's a woman who might be VP doesn't mean that every woman needs to be down with her."

 

Oprah's show is mixed with topics Oprah finds interesting (sometimes that means booking people she might not have on otherwise i.e. exposing crimes against children, etc.) to her favorite books or movies. Again, it is here right to have or not have who she wants on the show.

 

Her problem is that she (and very wisely) has never taken on a political view point before. When she came out to promote Obama (although I could be wrong) it was the first time she had made such a stance public. And there in lies the problem. She, in the past, has always been willing and able to listen to all sides of an agruement, which allowed her to appeal to the broadest base possible. Now that she has become a disciple for the messiah, she might feel a backlash that she has not experienced before.

 

Honestly, I don't think it has anything to do with whether or not she should have her on just because she is a woman. It has to do with her not being willing to show the borh sides like she has with just about everything in the past.

[whomper]

Again, does she often host people with political or social stances that she doesn't agree with? That's really the issue here. She didn't allow Thomas on the show and nobody should be remotely amazed at that. Even though, <<shocking>> dude is black.

 

 

Thomas has a bad stigma. Obama is Black Jesus. Big Difference. A woman VP candidate would have Oprah ringing out her bloomers and on the show immediately if she wasnt running against Obama. I firmly and truly believe that.

[detlef]

Once again, I agree with you " Just because she's a woman who might be VP doesn't mean that every woman needs to be down with her."

 

Oprah's show is mixed with topics Oprah finds interesting (sometimes that means booking people she might not have on otherwise i.e. exposing crimes against children, etc.) to her favorite books or movies. Again, it is here right to have or not have who she wants on the show.

 

Her problem is that she (and very wisely) has never taken on a political view point before. When she came out to promote Obama (although I could be wrong) it was the first time she had made such a stance public. And there in lies the problem. She, in the past, has always been willing and able to listen to all sides of an agruement, which allowed her to appeal to the broadest base possible. Now that she has become a disciple for the messiah, she might feel a backlash that she has not experienced before.

 

Honestly, I don't think it has anything to do with whether or not she should have her on just because she is a woman. It has to do with her not being willing to show the borh sides like she has with just about everything in the past.

Again, as I said, I am not aware of Oprah's policy on showing both sides and just sort of assumed based on what little I've seen that it was pretty much a parade of stuff she thought was cool. If what I think you're saying is true and she has hosted people who's message she's not into, then, yes, this does seem odd and she should take some flack. Not be forced to host her, obviously, but take some flack for not doing so.

[millerx]

Thomas has a bad stigma. Obama is Black Jesus. Big Difference. A woman VP candidate would have Oprah ringing out her bloomers and on the show immediately if she wasnt running against Obama. I firmly and truly believe that.

"ringing out her bloomers"

 

Funny, but I'm inclined to believe this as well.

[Cunning Runt]

Thomas has a bad stigma. Obama is Black Jesus. Big Difference. A woman VP candidate would have Oprah ringing out her bloomers and on the show immediately if she wasnt running against Obama. I firmly and truly believe that.

 

I agree.

 

She clearly does not want to lend any legitimacy to the McCain/Palin ticket by having her on. She's for Obama and has a platform tailor-made to allow for her to highlight him without having to do the same for the person(s) she wants Obama to defeat.

 

Methinks Oprah is in a position to withstand any backlash that may come her way as a result of snubbing Palin.

[WaterMan]

This sums up how much this election is about the issues.

 

Palin is nothing but a distraction.

[Bird Dog]

The Washington Post is reporting that Sarah Palin and her husband were part owners of a business that was shut down by the state for noncompliance with state regulations:

 

State records show the business ran into trouble with Alaska's division of corporations business and professional licensing after Palin became governor of the state in 2006.

 

A Feb. 11, 2007 letter to the governor's business partner advises that the car wash had "not filed its biennial report and/or paid its biennial fees," which were more than a year overdue.

 

The warning letter was written on state letterhead, which carried Palin's name at the top, next to the state seal.

 

On April 3, 2007, the state went further and issued a "certificate of involuntary dissolution" because of the car wash's failure to file its report and pay state licensing fees.

 

 

Must be that executive experience at work. Would any of you Palin lovers like to explain to me how this woman be trusted to run the government if she can't even run a car wash?

[budlitebrad]

Rasmussen polls after the RNC:

 

Obama -46%

McCain - 45%

 

But what's more surprising is that Palin was viewed favorably by 58% of voters, while Obama/McCain were at 57%.

[millerx]

The Washington Post is reporting that Sarah Palin and her husband were part owners of a business that was shut down by the state for noncompliance with state regulations:

 

State records show the business ran into trouble with Alaska's division of corporations business and professional licensing after Palin became governor of the state in 2006.

 

A Feb. 11, 2007 letter to the governor's business partner advises that the car wash had "not filed its biennial report and/or paid its biennial fees," which were more than a year overdue.

 

The warning letter was written on state letterhead, which carried Palin's name at the top, next to the state seal.

 

On April 3, 2007, the state went further and issued a "certificate of involuntary dissolution" because of the car wash's failure to file its report and pay state licensing fees.

 

 

Must be that executive experience at work. Would any of you Palin lovers like to explain to me how this woman be trusted to run the government if she can't even run a car wash?

I don't know...but I think she has definitely shown she can organize a community.

 

Oh, and she will be assisting with the running of the gov't as a VP, she's not at the top of the ticket unlike that certain someone with little or no experience.

[Bird Dog]

I don't know...but I think she has definitely shown she can organize a community.

 

Oh, and she will be assisting with the running of the gov't as a VP, she's not at the top of the ticket unlike that certain someone with little or no experience.

 

 

She should fit right in with McCain then, he has trouble keeping a plane in the air!

[Azazello1313]

My point is that maybe neither Obama's race or Palin's sex has anything to do with this. She is obviously very much into what Obama's message is and maybe she really doesn't like what she's learned about Palin. That he's black or she's a woman doesn't need to matter. So, just because Palin is the first woman to be on the GOP ticket shouldn't mean she's an automatic for the show.

 

Honestly, I've watched Oprah about never, so I don't really know what kind of people she hosts. If she often or even sometimes has guests whose stances she's not into just to be fair to all sides than this would seem like a poor choice. Is that, in fact, the case?

 

However, if the show is about people she thinks are cool, then this makes perfect sense. My wife is as big a pro-woman's rights and advancement as anyone I know and she likes almost nothing about Palin. Just because she's a woman who might be VP doesn't mean that every woman needs to be down with her.

 

well the thing is, palin's "story" is perfect for oprah's audience. keep in mind, oprah's fan base has traditionally been very much spread across the political spectrum. that has been a major key to her success. if not for her politics and the fact that she is opposing a political candidate oprah herself is so heavily invested in, they would be begging palin to come on her show. apparently, fans are requesting it in droves. nobody is saying she doesn't have a "right" to produce her show however the hell she wants....it just puts her in an interesting position is all. does she want her show to be partisan or non-partisan? oprah's personal political sentiments versus the interests of her show. she is being forced to choose.

Edited September 5, 2008 by Azazello1313

[Azazello1313]

Palin also cut funding for programs that helped/supported young teen mothers and pregnancies.... She said something like there should nto be programs to help raise a child and it is the responsibility of the mother.

 

I'm sure you just skimmed this off some left wing blog, so there's the question of accuracy, but either way, I'm sure she cut government funding for a lot of stuff. that's the sort of thing you have to do if you want to balance a budget.

[budlitebrad]

For those of you who seem so enamored with Gov. Sarah Palin, it might be worth noting that she oversees the budget for the Department of Education and Early Development Special Schools in Alaska.

These funds provide supplementary educational services to students with severe disabling conditions and the Alaska Challenge Youth Academy. The resident school where the child would normally be placed does not have the resources to provide an adequate educational program. Without the supplementary services the child’s needs would not be met by the local school district in most cases.

 

The Annual budget for 2007, which preceded Gov. Palin was $8,265,300.

 

 

 

The Annual budget for 2008, enacted by Gov. Palin is $3,156,000.

 

 

 

The Annual budget for 2009, enacted by Gov. Palin is $3,156,000.

 

 

 

This is a cut in special needs services to children in Alaska of 5,109,300 , or 62%.

 

 

Did 62% of all of the special needs children in Alaska stop having needs once Gov. Palin took office?

 

False. See the retraction from one media source here:

 

Palin also cut funding for programs that helped/supported young teen mothers and pregnancies.... She said something like there should nto be programs to help raise a child and it is the responsibility of the mother.

 

And also false. If some media outlets actually did research, they'd see that funding was actually increased.

 

I am no die-hard Palin supporter and I disagree with her on plenty of issues, but if you're just going to post garbage from the Washington Post and left-wing blogs, I think it's best to just lock this thread.

Edited September 5, 2008 by budlitebrad

[detlef]

I'm sure you just skimmed this off some left wing blog, so there's the question of accuracy, but either way, I'm sure she cut government funding for a lot of stuff. that's the sort of thing you have to do if you want to balance a budget.

Werd. Dogging Palin because she cut spending on social programs is like dogging Obama 'cause he's against the Iraq war. Neither are stances that either person is remotely afraid of anyone finding out about. If you think we should be spending more money on things like Special Ed and pregnant teens, you were probably not too fired up about voting GOP regardless of whom he chose as his VP.

[millerx]

For those of you who seem so enamored with Gov. Sarah Palin, it might be worth noting that she oversees the budget for the Department of Education and Early Development Special Schools in Alaska.

These funds provide supplementary educational services to students with severe disabling conditions and the Alaska Challenge Youth Academy. The resident school where the child would normally be placed does not have the resources to provide an adequate educational program. Without the supplementary services the child’s needs would not be met by the local school district in most cases.

 

The Annual budget for 2007, which preceded Gov. Palin was $8,265,300.

 

 

 

The Annual budget for 2008, enacted by Gov. Palin is $3,156,000.

 

 

 

The Annual budget for 2009, enacted by Gov. Palin is $3,156,000.

 

 

 

This is a cut in special needs services to children in Alaska of 5,109,300 , or 62%.

 

 

Did 62% of all of the special needs children in Alaska stop having needs once Gov. Palin took office?

Are you telling us you actually know the dollar amount needed to fund the special needs children in Alaska?

What is the correct price tag for funding these special needs children?

[detlef]

Generally parents want increases.

Generally, I want a million dollars and lap dance from Scarlet Johanson. Could somebody hook me up with that please?