Did Oprah Okay That?

Yep, I’m gonna do it. Hold on. Who wants to talk about Oprah mother f-ing Winfrey?? Pardon my language, it sounds better out loud rather than read, given intonation, emphasis and whatnot. And just for fun, let’s talk about politics too. Anyone still reading?

I checked out the blog of an “online content guru” for the Chicago Sun times, Mark Bieganski. He claims to follow Oprah “like a religion” (vomit), and even Tivos the lady. I guess he’s too busy stalking Oprah (again, vomit) for me to say…get a hobby? Oh, wait. Anyhow, in September he wrote a blog entitled “Republican women's group boycotts Winfrey; put Palin on show they say. What do you think?”

Here’s the link: http://blogs.suntimes.com/oprah/2008/09/republican_womens_group_boycot.html

To sum up that particular blog entry, he “reported” that Oprah does not currently want to have Palin on her show (I vote just have Tina Fey instead..equally entertaining) because she does not want her show to be a political platform for anyone. Oprah has since given her endorsement to, and even campaigned for Obama. The 4,500 Republican woman strong group is quoted stating "[Sarah Palin] is an icon, and set her herself up to be such a women's rights and women's issues person. To have the first vice president of our lifetime on the Republican ticket being a woman and to sit it out regardless of what her personal political beliefs were was disingenuous, we felt.” Oprah claims that she would like to have Palin on the show, but only after the elections.

In response to this blog, there were numerous comments from readers mostly using the space to employ their own political agendas. The comments said one or two of basically four things; they either supported Oprah’s choice not to have Palin on the show, bashed Oprah and called her racist (of course they did), supported Palin, or bashed Palin/McCain calling them stupid or something of the sort (of course they are).

I noticed that almost all of the people responding and commenting to this blog were women (nooo).

Reader Mrs. LJ writes:

“I don't feel that Oprah should succumb to the ideas and thoughts of others and place her values and integrity on the line to please anyone or place her name on anything she doesn’t feel she has to. If so many people are for "rights", Oprah has the "right" to do what she feels and she does not have to give an explanation for her decision.”

J in Georgia agrees:

“We must remember that #1. Oprah is a woman. So what is the point of destroying one woman who has accomplished a lot to force her to put another woman on her show. Is this showing sisterhood? #2 Oprah is also African-
American, which I am sure is not the only reason she supports her long-time friend, Obama. So what are the republican women asking of this woman who has helped to make the careers of many whites and a few blacks. She has been criticized by blacks of catering more to whites. 
Are the republic women asking Oprah to give up her right to choose who appears on her show, and succumb to threats to end her career to boost another woman's career. As a woman, I need someone to explain this entire logic to me. As an African-American (who has been denied rights), and as a woman (who has been denied rights), I say Oprah should stand her ground, regardless of the consequences.”

One response by reader mportch read:

“Oprah has played the women of the world like fine flute and lead them around by the ring in there nose. Now that she got what she wanted from them (wealth and power). She is now showing them the true racist that she is. Women burn your O mags and anything else to do with her. Oprah nice color of lipstick. BOYCOTT BOYCOTT BOYCOTT NOW NOW.”

Reader Mae wrote:

“I am not a fan of Obama or Palin. However, I am disappointed in Oprah and hope advertisers will boycott her show. Oprah seems to care only about two things..herself and money. The sooner advertisers boycott Oprah the sooner she will reconsider being fair. Why doesn't Oprah want to discuss the issues of both parties? Oprah would certainly have Palin on if she were African American. I won't be watching Oprah anymore. Oprah seems to be a racist.”

Reader Kathy responds to reader Mae:

“You are not defined by another individual. Why? Why? Why do we feel that Oprah is the person who will define you in life? Oprah has come from the bottom of the bottom and worked her way up to the top not to be defined by any of you.
I am happy that Oprah is standing by her word unlike the 'Repuuuublican' (Republican) party.
To Mae (posting on 9/11): So, I'm assuming you do not watch the Oprah Winfrey Show because for you to say she is a racist is beyond IDIOT. Let us not judge for ye will be judged. Oprah has always had a diverse audience.
How about we fight for the issues we believe in. Stand against abuse of our VETS, children, & elders. Instead of repeating "the bridge to nowhere." How about we say "the WAR to nowhere."

Unfortunately there are Palin supporters folks, and Oprah haters if you can believe. Mrs.Mac (all dressed in black I presume) writes:

“Governor Sarah Palin has more class than anyone who would seek cheap notoriety by being a target on the Oprah Winfrey show. She can impress the voters just fine without the Queen Of Sleaze's help. I cannot imagine anyone who wastes their time listening and watching that TV drivel having enough common sense to vote for anyone who would/could do this wonderful country any real good. Gov. Palin is probably now worried about Oprah's decision.”

And then we have the multitude of Palin/McLame bashers:

Rita writes:

“This group's spokeswoman is an idiot! Palin is the SECOND woman in our lifetime to run as VP -- does the name "Geraldine Ferraro" ring a bell to her? And besides that, no woman in her right mind is going to vote for Sarah Palin because she does not believe in rights for woman. She believes that woman who are raped and get pregnant or girls who are victims of incest and get pregnant should be forced that bear that child. My body--my decision, not hers! It's not about being pro-abortion, it is about being pro-choice!!!!”

All in all I saw some people (mostly women) in here trying to have a decent conversation/post their specific opinion about the question that the author Mark Bieganski asked. Some people used it as a civilized place to post their thoughts; others used it as a forum to attack (sometimes personally) other posters or Oprah/Palin themselves. Some posters shaped their posts based off of others whom had posted before them, some went off on their own new rant, but all had the same social agenda and they all wanted to be heard (even if they couldn’t spell/type (annoying)).

There seemed to be four different types of posts: those whom were pro-Oprah, the O-haters, the Pro-Palin/McLame, and the Palin/McCain loathers. This was clearly opened up and intentionally (wisely) left open by Mark in asking, “what do you think?” This way such postings didn’t foster an attack of the main author Mark, or the Sun Times. Smart move. Imagine, there would be people then not watching Oprah, not reading Mark’s intensely interesting Oprah blog, and reading the Chicago Tribune instead.

It’s hard to imagine that people can have such potty mouths when supposedly all grown up. However, here in lies the beauty of anonymity. Anonymity gives people the power to say or do whatever they want without it coming back to them. Would such discourse prevail if all of these women were face to face in a room? Probably not if they were all interested in keeping their hair attached to their heads and their manicures looking nice.

I did only see one post that was truly in reference to another specific post. The rest were mainly general responses about their personal beliefs, another invitation to really let your opinion fly. Although different values (repub vs. demo and whathaveyou), all posters seemed to have the same purpose; here’s my opinion, hear me. No one seemed to care about being accepted or resisted by the rest of the community. Again, maybe this is due to the anonymity of it all. Or it could the fact that no one really responded to anyone’s post in particular (except the one). Maybe no one even bothered to read anyone else’s post and only wanted to get their point across. I think the real winner here is that Mark used an open-ended question. He did not (until later) post his personal opinion about the issue, and left it to his readers to fight out. Well played Mark. The only thing these posters could say to him is hey-thanks for providing the space for us to complain about out daytime talk show preferences-with a touch of politics.