Advocates of Tolerance?


29 Comments for “Advocates of Tolerance?”

  1. posted by Tom Scharbach on

    I’m not sure what the fuss is about.

    The Advocate article reports both sides of the issue and doesn’t advocate one way or the other. If anything, the article seems to tilt slightly in favor of “Oh, hell, watch it.” Virginia Postrel’s advocacy op-ed in Bloomberg favors watching and is more polemic, but it makes good points. It isn’t as if the two are at loggerheads.

    As to LGBTs watching Roseanne, some will, some won’t. Does anyone care?

    Reply
  2. posted by MR Bill on

    I never watched the original, and am unlikely to watch this iteration.

    Reply
  3. posted by Doug on

    Why would I want to watch Roseanne Barr who screeched the national anthem and grabbed her crotch. She is as disgusting as Trump.

    Reply
    • posted by Jorge on

      Oh, heavens, no, Madonna would have a weeping fit in the bathroom.

      Reply
      • posted by Doug on

        What does that mean in common every day english?

        Reply
        • posted by Jorge on

          It’s a botched reference to a scene in Curb Your Enthusiasm in which a picture of Jesus weeps in a bathroom (I thought it was a picture of the Virgin Mary).

          I was also meant to refer to the singer Madonna shoving a Puerto Rican flag on her crotch during a concert.

          Reply
    • posted by Lori Heine on

      I simply cannot understand you. We get word salad from some commenters here, and mind salad from others.

      Roseanne Barr put herself on the line for LGBT rights YEARS before many others did. You’re either only about 17 years old, and remember none of that, or you have amnesia.

      I say good for her. I rejoice that a strong and outspoken woman can thrive and survive for decades on TV. She’s an inspiration.

      If you are so childish and petty that you just can’t get your undies un-bunched because–horrors!–Roseanne supports Donald Trump, then your opinion isn’t worth a sh*tstain.

      Reply
      • posted by Lori Heine on

        In my last comment, I was not addressing Jorge, who appears to get what Roseanne is all about.

        I don’t think she’s anything close to a standard-issue Trumper. She’s a free spirit. We need more of those these days.

        Reply
      • posted by Doug on

        time to get bad on you meds again.

        Reply
        • posted by Lori Heine on

          You are a bigot. Like most leftist trash of your ilk, you further stigmatize those with mental health conditions because it suits your power-hungry and amoral ends.

          “Progressive” officially means nothing. You are no more than an alternative sort of extreme conservative, bent on accumulating power at the expense of the marginalized and the vulnerable.

          What a fraud you are.

          Reply
          • posted by Doug on

            First I’m ‘leftish trash’ and then I’m ‘extreme conservative’. Wow, have I got my bases covered or what.

      • posted by David Bauler on

        Roseanne always had a thing for wild conspiracy theories. Politically, she tends to be very career-pragmatic.

        By that, I mean she looks at what sells.

        She flirted with Green-Socialist presidential ticket at one point. It was a subject of a reality TV show or something similar.

        Now, she backs Trump – which could help the relaunch of her TV sitcom.

        I’m not sure that she is a free spirit, mainly because her politics seem to be tied up with whatever career thing she is working on.

        Reply
      • posted by JohnInCA on

        Roseanne ran on TV from ’88 to ’97. A pretty good run, but one that’s been off-air for something like two decades now. Someone that was a senior in high school the year she went off air would be almost 40.

        And from a few quick google searches, about the only thing she’s done since then is run for president (in which she used a fair share of transphobic language), (badly) sing the national anthem, and gotten into a weird celebrity feud with Trump from before he was a politician.

        I don’t say thing to question her “ally” status (others who care more have already done so), I point out the dates to point out that someone doesn’t have to be 17 to not know much about Roseanne. I imagine most folks in their 30s only have a notional idea of who she is and what she’s done.

        Reply
  4. posted by Jorge on

    “Both Barr and her character are supporters of President Donald Trump”

    I thought the character was but Barr was not.

    Perhaps the LGBT community doesn’t understand the direction of the show because fewer of us are parents. There are enough enjoyable clips of Roseanne Connor struggling with personally conservative sensibilities as a mother that it’s hardly a surprise. My favorite is the one where she gives a lecture on drugs.

    You know back when Roseanne was airing the struggle between liberal and conservative sensitivities usually favored being open minded because the alternative had very destructive effects. Nowhere was that clearer than the gay experience, and that’s probably a big reason why Roseanne Barr pushed for gay storylines. The change that has happened since then is that the struggle between liberal and conservative values is not accepted anymore. Family values, respect for authority and religious faith, hard work and loyalty, they’re looked at these days only as things that are destructive. The trend has been not to try prevail in contending with conservative values, but to try to destroy them outright. The people who see that don’t like it, and seized a chance with Trump.

    I never watched the original, and am unlikely to watch this iteration.

    It was a little trashy (I mean my God, how depressed-looking Darlene and her boyfriend looked, not to mention actually moving him into the house???), but Roseanne gave three times as good as she got. I enjoyed it growing up. Did I look down on them a bit? Oh yeah. Now? I begin to see where that classic “I’m pissed off that I gotta get my tired ass off the couch to deal with my children who damn well know it and I’m gonna do it every single time” act comes from.

    Reply
  5. posted by MR Bill on

    Barr is addicted to conspiracy propaganda (stop calling them “theories “) crazier than Planet Pizza : “”In this fantasy world, all of the far right’s wildest dreams come true: Q promises that Clinton, Obama, Podesta, Abedin, and even McCain are all either arrested and wearing secret police-issued ankle monitors, or just about to be indicted; that the Steele dossier is a total fabrication personally paid for by Clinton and Obama; and that the Las Vegas massacre was most definitely an inside job connected to the Saudi-Clinton cabal.”
    Barr did not mention #QAnon in her tweet, but she has repeatedly tweeted or retweeted links about the theory and asked whether QAnon could contact her via direct message. Most recently, on March 23, Barr retweeted a summary of Q-based theories of how the just-passed omnibus spending bill would unleash law enforcement on the pedophile ring. “ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/03/31/the-conspiracy-theory-behind-a-curious-roseanne-barr-tweet-explained/?utm_term=.b67697ea7549

    Reply
    • posted by Jorge on

      Barr is addicted to conspiracy propaganda (stop calling them “theories “) crazier than Planet Pizza :

      “We know this, or “know” this, because “Q,” an anonymous account on the 4chan message board, says so and claims to be a government operative with the highest level of security clearance.”

      That reminds me of the anonymous account on some other message board who claims to have been an employee at one of the bottom rungs of the bankrupt Sir Tech, the video game company that released the main “Wizardry” PC games.

      On second thought, wait, STOP

      Roseanne Barr is not the first, or even within the first hundred, of celebrities who have restated dumb conspiracy propaganda and brought them into the mainstream. You can probably find a good 15 to 20 of them repeating nonsense about Mike Pence alone, and double that number repeating dumb nonsense about race.

      I will have no part of a campaign to bump Roseanne to the head of the line just because she voted for a Republican. That’s what this really is about, and I didn’t even need to read to the end of that article to conclude that.

      Reply
    • posted by Tom Scharbach on

      Barr is yet another example of a fringer celebrity spouting wacked-out nonsense. She’s not alone. If you wanted to count wigged out celebrities (both left and right) confusing celebrity with the ability to think clearly, you’d have to borrow hands from a couple dozen friends to do it.

      So I don’t care what Barr thinks. But it is worth nothing the post that Barr retweeted because it is a marvel:

      * Bill passes, immediately releasing funds to our military.
      * Swamp drain begins, military seizes TRILLIONS in cabal assets, returning them to the people.
      * IG report drops showing just how f—ed up this swamp really is, revealing pedophilia, extortion, murder, treason and SEDITION. Punishable by DEATH.
      * Panic? No panic. This has been planned so far in advance, very few understand how calculated every move is. The strings will be cut from the propaganda machine and the people will stop falling for the garbage MSM. They will be so appalled by the vileness and sliminess of these creatures it will make them SICK to their stomach.
      * Patriots take back our country.

      Really? It is a near-perfect example of the fringe right wet’s dream. The military pulls a coup, seizes TRILLIONS in assets, shuts down the FAILING FAKE mainstream media, and installs a government of PATRIOTS!

      Now that’s a scenario that any American loyal to the Constitution would welcome.

      Yeah, those morons are patriots, all right.

      Reply
      • posted by Jorge on

        Really? It is a near-perfect example of the fringe right wet’s dream. The military pulls a coup, seizes TRILLIONS in assets, shuts down the FAILING FAKE mainstream media, and installs a government of PATRIOTS!

        Oh, that’s right.

        One of my tells that a military coup is about to happen is for my pet politician to have to resign in a trumped up scandal.

        Reply
  6. posted by David Bauler on

    The original series was culturally blue collar and politically progressive. It was prochoice, prounion, profeminist and had more gay characters then your average network TV series.

    The TV remake is basically marketed as the new, Last Man Standing…..but with Roseanne….who decided that being a Trump supporter would play well in getting her career reignited.

    Roseanne ran for president, as a LEFTIST third party candidate. I kinda thought that was a publicity stunt then. This sudden Trumpism seems like a career move.

    Reply
  7. posted by David Bauler on

    West Wing tried to humanize both parties and give pretty good pro and con explanation on many political issues. If Roseanne does that, it be a hit.

    If Roseanne tries to be, Last Man Standing, it will be popular with hardcore Trump conservatives, and maybe last a few seasons.

    Last Man Standing wasn’t overtly homophobic. It had an obligatory gay episode. It was transphobic, and very big on men not being effeminate.

    Reply
  8. posted by Lori Heine on

    “First I’m ‘leftish trash’ and then I’m ‘extreme conservative’. Wow, have I got my bases covered or what.”

    Twenty-first Century Leftists ARE conservatives. They are stuck in a time warp. They still think it’s 1969.

    There is, therefore, no contradiction in what I said. Real progressivism does exist–but you have nothing to do with that. Counterfeit screws up any system of currency, and the faux-progressive fraud propped up by people like you makes it more difficult for people to wake the hell up to what’s going on.

    Progressivism has never been more urgently necessary. But liars must be seen for what they are. And people with zero principles–who wouldn’t recognize progressive principle if it bit them in the a$$–need to be recognized for what they are.

    Roseanne’s mental condition is none of my business. But what I can say is that she–like many Trump supporters, and like some people (such as I) who did not vote for Trump–recognizes that she didn’t leave the Left. The Left left her. As a matter of fact, that was what she told Jimmy Kimmel.

    Reply
    • posted by MR Bill on

      Well, that’s what my just late former governor and Senator Zell Miller said: he started as Gov. Lester Maddox chief of staff, and after 16 years as Lt.Gov. He became a,moderate liberal, pushing through the Lottery during Scholarship to all GA colleges..i knew his sons in college, enough to be invited to their weddings, and Zell used to throw a birthday party in some ATL hotel ballroom with beer on tap and country bands..hell, Willie NelsoNelson was a frequent guest at the Governor’s mansion…but Gay Rigbts and his ideas about hip hop pushed him back to being just another Southern Conservative, voting for the disastrousBush Tax Cut…from where I stand, he just turned back into the same guy he was under Maddox.

      Reply
      • posted by Lori Heine on

        That is indeed unfortunate. But it has zero to do with the direction any other individual might choose to take.

        Reply
        • posted by MR Bill on

          Actually, I’ve seen plenty of folks, especially in politics, who were moderates in the 70s-80s go full right wing, especially in the Clinton years, and after 9-11. In Georgia, the ruling class stayed pretty much the same, but went from Conservative Democrat to Right Wing Republican, repudiating former positions: Sen. Johnny Issacson, or even Newt Gingrich, who beat a conservative Democrat who was absolutely worse (no matter Gringrich’s subsequent history).

          Reply
          • posted by Lori Heine on

            That does nothing to change the fact that many of the huge number of people who relate to Roseanne’s rebooted TV program have evolved as they have because of their own life experience and their own concerns.

            Sure, we can come up with examples of people who did so for political reasons, or because they wanted public popularity for some other purpose. That argument totally falls apart when anyone attempts to apply it to every individual in this country.

  9. posted by David Bauer on

    Meanwhile, in more important news……

    Reply
    • posted by Lori Heine on

      What encouragement conservatives and libertarians can take from that! Yes, just jam your head back into the sand. Pretend that what’s happening around this country now isn’t real. Read “What Happened” for the four hundredth time and join a sob-sister book club to discuss it with others who agree with absolutely everything you think.

      By all means, help to hasten the demise of the statist Left. The sooner it’s made itself completely irrelevant to everyone else, the better.

      Reply
  10. posted by David Bauler on

    Lori

    Please, calm down. We are taking about the revival of a network TV series. It is hardly as important as say, current events — outside of the pop culture revivalist genre — and I was saying as much.

    Roseanne is neither a conservative nor a libertarian — and the TV series is (unless the people behind the scenes are morons) probably not going to advocate for such beliefs 24/7. A handful of network TV sitcoms have tried to endorse everything that Democrats or Republicans like, politically speaking, and they rarely last long.

    The better TV shows — that get into politics — tend to take the path that the West Wing TV series did. Their is a right and wrong way to deal with partisan politics and debate within the context of a network TV sitcom. Even if the series is going to have one of the main characters be a Trumpist.

    In real life; She [Roseanne] is flirting with Trumpism (I would argue in large part because it helps sell her show). Not too long ago, she was flirting with some sort of Green-Socialist alliance.

    Reply
  11. posted by David Bauler on

    Last Man Standing wasn’t terribly funny and the political commentary involved was poorly written. Tim Allen didn’t help his case, especially when it came to the possibility of the series getting picked up by some other network.

    When the original Roseanne TV series went into religious or partisan political issues (as opposed to more nonpartisan family values issues, like, “don’t do drugs”), it was generally funny and smart.

    Hopefully, when the revised Roseanne TV series gets involved with the current political landscape — it is also funny and smart.

    Reply

Leave a Comment