April 13, 2007: The show was pre-recorded today so there was minimal talk about current affairs.

Elisabeth read about  Purity Balls in Glamour Magazine and brought the topic to the View: There is a growing trend, particularly among conservative Christians, to hold galas called “Purity Balls” for fathers and daughters at which girls pledge to remain virgins until marriage and fathers pledge to help protect their daughters and also lead an unblemished life.

Elisabeth: These are really big things happening now with young girls, even starting from the age of like 10 or 11.”
Joy: In Colorado
Elisabeth: In Colorado. They’re called Purity Balls and they’re almost like a cotillion, like a big father / daughter dance where the dad’s take their daughters and they really celebrate their relationship and then the dad’s open up a nice box and give the girls a promise ring to keep their virginity and purity until they’re married. That’s the ideal situation.
Joy: What is it, the Woody Allen High School?
Elisabeth: No. It’s not.
Joy: What a sick concept.
Elisabeth: Why do you think it is a sick? I think it is such a great idea. Maybe not the whole big dress and ball but I think the promise ring is such a great idea.
Joy: Just the title of it- Purity Balls.
Barbara: I don’t know who you make a promise to but somehow promising your father that you are going to remain a virgin until you're with another man
Joy: Until you give it up to your boyfriend
Barbara: I find that very creepy
Joy: It’s a little creepy.

I find it pretty sad that people like Barbara and Joy need to belittle any efforts by families to keep their daughters safe. 

In today's society Sexually Transmitted Diseases are increasing, depression among young women is at record highs and the incidence of teen dating violence is also on the rise.
 
Anything a dad can do to support his daughter through the very difficult adolescent and high school years has to be a step in the right direction.

 Who is this Rose McGowan!

She tries to contribute something intellectual to the conversation. It’s a little hard to follow, but:

Rose McGowan: “I think the reason a big prejudge went on there and I am not saying I am not the only one because every school that I went to usually had, I mean, you could just take those guys and make them a cookie cutter down the line, and the girl version of them. I was usually persecuted by them, or my friends were at every single school I went to, and I went to a lot. And I think it was very easy to look at them and think, you know, rich White kid who looks like the kind of guy who used to put me in a headlock on the way to gym class and…I really actually hope you’re guilty because you kind of stand for all of them”
Joy: Who, who, who?
Elisabeth: You were of thinking that at the time?
Rose McGowan: “Those guys. I was assuming, and I think everybody else was and the reality is a lot of times people get popped like lets say you get popped for stealing …how many times have you stolen before? I’ve actually never stolen but let’s say a person gets caught for car theft...”
Elisabeth: “So you’re saying maybe not just maybe just not this time.”
Rose McGowan: “I’m saying maybe they didn’t rape this woman but I would say there is probably definitely been with them I would bet each and every one of them, please don’t sue me, possibly a long history of really inappropriate things.”
Joy: “You think so?”
Rose McGowan: “It’s a real frat mentality.”
Elisabeth: “This is the danger of being accused of something when you are innocent. Because now things like this will stick on them and these are boys who also did sacrifice themselves for their school and yes they had a moment where they had strippers in and is that the best thing that you can do morally? maybe not. But now being accused of this crime which they are innocent of is completely painting them with a brush which is so…its awful. For the rest of their lives they’re going to have to carry this burden.

Rose McGowan ought to be ashamed of herself.

Her running at the mouth puts the three words uttered by Don Imus to shame.

Some highlights of McGowan’s life:

• -She was raised in a commune
• -She dated Marilyn Manson for 5 years (I am sure he never shared air with a stripper. Are you kidding me! Talk about gross. For info on Marilyn Manson click here. Actually while he was dating her, he didn’t need a stripper. Click here to see her choice of dress for an MTV awards show)
• -The film in which she currently stars “Grindhouse” is a parody on B slasher movies. Her character is: A STRIPPER!
• -The only difference between her vocation and that of the Duke accuser is their pay scale. Does she really think men think of her any differently when they see her in posters, on magazine covers or in movies. Does she think she garners a lot of respect from the man who gawk at and fantasize about her? See the recent April 4, 2007 cover of the Rolling Stone
• -Current Rumor: She has broken up the marriage of the the director of Grandiose. For info on her "gross behavior click here.

Perhaps it was poor timing, but to have this woman guest host this particular week demonstrates poor taste. They should have held her accountable and challenged some of her statements, particularly in light of her own personal behavior.

She, like Joy, owes the Duke Lacrosse players an apology.

April 12, 2007

Joy went into an amazing diatribe today about the completely vindicated Duke Lacrosse team and Don Imus. She expressed her belief that the young men from Duke were a part of the “Little White Boys' Club”, the apparent precursor to the “Old Boys' Club” for the old White guys.

When Elisabeth demonstrated some concern about Joy’s “view” Joy seemed to try to back peddle her way out of it. The problem for Joy: everyone knows what the “Old Boys' Club” means. Joy is of the belief that these young men are spoiled, wealthy White kids who don’t respect women in general, but particularly Black women.

Joy: “I don’t believe in firing him. I think the marketplace will determine whether someone stays on the air or not…It’s interesting that it comes at the same time as this Duke rape case you know these boys are now off because the girl lied and she wasn’t raped. However It is interesting to me that the, ah little white boys club was in effect in the Duke University situation, too. You have a bunch of White boys sitting around with Black girls coming in and stripping. All right they didn’t rape them but…”
Rose McGowan: “but they’re gross.”
Joy: “but they’re gross. The same thing with Imus and his old boys club and I mean old. Old White guys sitting around making comments about women.”
Elisabeth (looking shocked) tries to jump in with: “Did these boys specifically request…”
Joy: “It’s really got to stop but I don’t want to be the one to stop it. I want the marketplace to stop it in his case.”
Elisabeth: “I hear you on that. Did these boys specifically request a Black female to come and strip for them?”
Rose McGowan interjecting: “They had two. They had two. They had two. There were two.”
Joy: “It doesn’t matter. It’s still a stripper. I don’t care about the color.”
Elisabeth: “I am just saying, you were saying White boys club so you did care about the color right.”
Rose McGowan: “But they had two”
Joy: “Those are White boys. That’s a White boys club.”
Elisabeth: “I’m just trying to clarify because it seemed to me as though”
Rose McGowan: “But they had two Black strippers”
Joy: “I’m not talking about that. I am talking about the boys. They were all White boys weren’t they?”
Elisabeth: “Yes”
Joy: “Okay. That’s all.”


Joy, that is not all.

What nerve to compare these young men, whose lives have been put on hold for a year, whose families have lived with them in Hell on Earth while their names have been dragged through the mud and whose reputations may never be what they once were, to Don Imus.

How many people stood up and decried these young men and demanded action be taken because a woman who was Black made allegations. Had the woman been White would there have been the same uproar one year ago? I assure you, no.

The people who choose to fan the flames of racial mistrust leapt upon this situation, to capitalize on what they hoped would be a very public example of the evil ways of rich White kids versus a poor Black girl.

Now we know the truth. That girl LIED, LIED and then LIED again. It doesn’t really matter why she lied. While she should be punished for her behavior, no punishment will erase the pain these men endured. These men won’t be able to sue her- she has nothing. How can they be made whole? They can’t. They can simply move forward and begin to live their lives again.

It’s true these boys made a choice to hire a stripper for a party- something I find distasteful but recognize happens across this country millions of times each year. It is also true that the woman chose to be a stripper, a right she has in this country. While no self-respecting woman would choose this as a vocation, there are those women who, for whatever sad reasons, do. While I feel sorry for her and the state of her life, she had no right to falsely accuse these men of one of the most serious crimes facing women today.

Her false accusations will influence public opinion for years to come. Future rapists will remind victims about this case to undermine the confidence about seeking redress. Future jurors will remember this case and may see women as less credible.

All of the people who stood up against these young men and condemned them without regard to the facts should now offer very public apologies.

Joy, you should apologize.

April 11, 2007

More on the Imus fallout:

As the women go on about Imus, the discussion veered towards the notion that a white guy can’t use racially charged terms but the black youth of the inner city can and in fact need to use these terms in their art, as though it is cathartic.

Only Elisabeth seems to understand that any use of these terms belittles the women of color regularly slurred in the art of this culture. She quotes lyrics from the current number 1 and 2 Rap songs that include the “n” word, the “b” word, the “ho” word… Throughout the conversations of past two days, Elisabeth has clearly stated her belief that the Imus suspension is more like a vacation. She has also articulated her position that no one should be using these terms because it is irresponsible.

Rosie, who doesn’t appear to listen to anyone else throws in her two sense about why these artists do what they do:

“There is something different about young black artists living their reality and using the clay of their life to form the art that becomes their vessel.”

The clay of their life… wow, now that is really profound.

Here’s the problem, Rosie: Young black men and women don’t only use this language in their “art” they use this language in their everyday interactions with each other. Anyone who spends any time with the under privileged youth of today would have to honestly admit that the language of these children is horrifying. The use of derogatory, pejorative language in everyday life not only reflects upon their so-called reality, it reinforces it. It makes young Black girls and Black women seem less valued. It demeans young Black men.

This language and these attitudes are glorified by the children and teenagers in the inner cities, and increasingly in the suburbs. 99% of these kids will never have the opportunity to live like the rappers or hip hoppers they idolize. They will remain trapped in horrible situations feeling like there is no way out. Art should inspire people to try to make the world better not retreat into weak acceptance of current hopelessness.

Maybe some of these artists should focus on using the clay that reflects their successful lives rather than focusing on the clay of hatred and dismay.

Maybe people like Rosie should stop buying into this idiocy that justifies the behavior of thugs and instead begin promoting those people of color who strive to be positive role models for the kids that so desperately want to believe there is a way out.

April 11, 2007

Today we again revisit the tiresome Imus mess.

Joy has an interesting insight on why the Black community is so upset: “The only thing I could come up with is that you know Obama is now running for President. It’s like, excuse me- you can’t do that now. The Black community feels empowered in a certain way, as they should. And its like for years we have been taking this racist talk. Now we’re not doin’ it any more… (Obama) is a symbol of the power that has now come into the Black community, I think.”

Does this mean that Imus can make fun of Hispanic girls because we have yet to see the Hispanic community feel empowered in the oppressive United States by running a presidential candidate? What about American Indians? What about every other cultural or religious group? Whether or not a group of people feels empowered should be irrelevant to good people making good decisions about the language they use in a public forum.

Additionally, the Black community should not feel proud that Obama is running for President. Obama is a young, middle-aged man with limited executive experience.  He is not an example of a talented Black man working his way up the system and breaking through a barrier based on his talent.  He exemplifies all that is wrong with affirmative action.  People have pulled him up the ladder, prematurely, because he is Black, not because he is talented.  This is not to say that he does not have the potential to be President. His is not the kind of success that should inspire, it should sadden.

If Obama had chosen to say "I am so proud that the American people think I have what it takes to be President of the greatest country on Earth.  I want to be President some day, in fact I will be President some day.  But now is not the time.  I am going to work hard in the Senate and take advantage of every opportunity that comes my way to bring the people of this country together.  I am going to work to expand my knowledge of domestic policy and foreign affairs so that one day, when the time is right, I will be ready to step up to the plate and represent all of the people of this fine country.Thank you all for your support and thank you in advance for the guidance and support I hope you give me in the future." 

Now that would have been a man of whom we could all have been proud.

April 10, 2007

Rosie's back and has immediately demonstrated her lack of knowledge about our Constitution.

The women started the show with more talk on the Imus debacle and what consequences he should face for his racist comments.

Rosie: Heres the thing: There's free speech in America and you can say anything that you want in this country and to think that you can be penalized for it by a corporation

A quick lesson about the Bill of Rights: The Founders were concerned that the newly formed government, like virtually all governments, would progress towards tyranny if left unchecked. To safeguard the individual citizens against this possibility they adopted the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights protects the citizens from the government.

Freedom of speech is a right guaranteed in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Congress shall make no law does not mean that a corporation can have no rules.

Despite Rosies fear to the contrary, in an Imus type situation it is the corporation who must penalize the employee. The corporation has a fiduciary duty to its shareholders to ensure that employee behavior doesnt negatively impact the profits and therefore shareholder dividends.

If an employee like Imus offends consumers, i.e. listeners, they may tune out. A corporation must be responsive to the public reaction to its employees and take whatever action necessary to protect its business interests. If suspending Imus meets those demands then the corporation should suspend him. If a two week suspension doesnt quell the community ire than the corporation may need to take additional action.

Again, corporations must make decisions about the punishment an employee may face for exhibiting inappropriate behavior or speech that violates the norms of societal decency.

For information about the history of the Constitution and Bill of Rights please visit the following link:

http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/constitution_history.html

To read the Bill of Rights visit the following link:

http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

Joy on Ann Coulter

After guest host Valerie Bertinelli asked why Imus is being held up to a different standard than people like Paris Hilton or Ann Coulter, Joy piped in that “Paris Hilton is so stupid that no one cares.” She went on: “The same with Ann Coulter. She is a joke also. Ann Coulter is a joke.” She goes on “(Coulter) says plenty of things and she doesn’t get much of a time out until her next book and then she is back.”

While I certainly don’t agree with everything Coulter says or writes, it is humorous to think about Joy Bayer assessing and then belittling the intellectual prowess of Ann Coulter. Ann Coulter may be a lot of things, but a joke isn’t one of them. A debate between Coulter and Bayer about anything would be a debacle for Bayer and a riot for everyone else.

April 9, 2007

No Rosie today.  She needed another day off. I anxiously await her return.

The Women on Imus

Everyone knows Imus is an extremist whose primary purpose is to push the envelope through shock talk. Last week’s comments by Imus about the women on the Rutgers’ basketball team were clearly racist. These women work hard to be the best athletes they can be and to represent their school in a respectful manner. They had no dog in any fight with Imus. He spoke with the purpose to demean and to hurt.

BW doesn’t think Imus is a man of malice. As she talked about how he has done everything in his power to apologize… she informs the audience that Imus and his wife run a cattle farm for kids who have cancer and 10% of the kids who go to this farm are black. Apparently, that makes it all okay. Yes she says it was terrible but…

Joy, as usual, refers back to Mel Gibson, who she says went into rehab as an excuse. Imus didn’t make excuses. Barbara then points out “he’s not trying to give an excuse” as though this is a good thing.

We should be asking ourselves whether or not there is any difference between a stone cold sober person making racist remarks and a person who is drunk beyond imagine making racist remarks. Of course there is a difference. The Imus comments are far worse than Gibson’s because he should have been able to control himself.

Imus was in complete control of his faculties and made a conscious choice to say truly insensitive, racist things about completely innocent people. Gibson was out of his mind drunk and rambled on about Jews in a totally inappropriate manner. Gibson sought help for his drinking problem. He met with leaders of the Jewish community to try to come to grips with the feelings that surfaced when he was drunk. Somehow, he is more culpable.

This is an example of how these women turn things on their heads: the sane person should be pitied and the impaired person should be pilloried.

Elisabeth wants Imus to get a time out until Black History Month next year. Come on!

Joy has done a bit of a turn around on the speech issue. She now thinks the solution to bad speech is more speech. After her very critical comments about both Mel Gibson and Michael Richards in November she seems to have softened a bit. Could her tempered remarks be a reflection of ABCs efforts to protect Rosie O’Donnell from negative commentary about the things that she says?

In the end, BW concludes that “If we learn anything it is that words are not just something we just throw out there. Words hurt.”

This would be an interesting conversation for her to have with Rosie.

The women of Rutgers should not waste their energy feeling badly about the Imus comments. They should instead focus on the outpouring of support from around the country. These women should put the deranged commentary of a ratings-seeking talk show host in perspective.

The View is on Spring Break so it is all reruns. 

Please check in next week, beginning April 9, for commentary on the new shows.

As is typical after a huge Rosie blow-up, it was a very quiet day on the View today.

The most exciting discussion: Barbara Walters promoted her interview with Giuliani and his wife Judith, which airs tonight on 20/20.

The banter about Giuliani included the typical he is a flip flopper, he’s pro-choice, he’s been divorced, and his wife has been divorced… You would think this makes him more attractive to the liberals on the show. Rudy's marital problems may not tell us anything about who he is as a leader because we don't really know what his marriage was like.

Elisabeth noted that she believes people are thinking differently about what the first family should look like- people are becoming more accepting of past mistakes. 

 Criticizing after the fact is always easy. People's past conduct is relevant, particularly if it demonstrates patterns of behavior and if the behavior is recent.  On the other hand, many people make poor decisions, especially in their teens and early 20s. I hope that voters carefully consider candidates' past behavior and how they use lessons learned to make better decisions today.  

Rosie had some concerns about whether a person had ever gone from being a mayor to being President. Giuliani was mayor of New York City, population 8 million. If NYC was a state it would be the 12^th most populous state. Additionally, as the Mayor of NYC, Giuliani oversaw countless programs that employed over 300,000 people. There is no question he has the executive experience to be President. Only time will tell if voters think he has the temperament and ideological leanings to be President.

While three women on the View would be hard pressed to consider voting for a Republican, they did give him kudos for his conduct after September 11^th, although Joy expressed concern about the confusion between the fire and police departments after the attack. I am pretty sure we, and the 9/11 Commission have been all over that. Also, stay tuned… Rosie is going to pursue doing a show about the firefighters who are dying from exposure to toxins after September 11^th.

Rudy went to funerals.  He raised money for victims. He inspired the people of New York and the country with his resolve and directness. He led during one of the most trying times in our country. He is a street fighter; he is tough; he is not afraid to go toe to toe with those who challenge him.

Maybe he appeals to some conservatives because they think he will stand up to the press and Democrats in a way Bush does not and can not.

If the mayor of New Orleans had 10% of Giuliani’s skill, would the city and people have fared differently? I am confident that Giuliani would have, for example, made sure those buses that sat in parking lots were used to evacuate residents of the city.

The discussion about Presidential candidates will continue to heat up over the next several months. Giuliani was smart to get his personal story out early to diffuse issues about his personal life.

I look forward to Walters' future profiles of other candidates and comparing their treatment by the women on the View.

How is it possible that a woman as paranoid as Rosie is co-hosting a mainstream TV talk show? Is she serious? Is she merely a pawn of the left, being fed these talking points? While she gives conservatives great fodder, it seems at times like we are watching a train wreck in the making. Today’s show had to have ABC executives talking.

On Iran:
Rosie needs to take her own advice and do some googling to see how many people believe that Iran is justified in holding 15 sailors hostage.

Rosie summarizes the soldiers were shown on television and “they were not visibly injured or tortured” and the woman was shown wearing the traditional headgear and saying they were in the wrong place.

Rosie seems to have no difficulty believing the Iranians are being very kind to these soldiers even though Tony Blair is very concerned. While it is clearly Iran is violating the Geneva Convention by showing the hostages and releasing statements supposedly made by these hostages, Rosie is sympathetic to Iran.

It is ironic that Rosie can put so much trust in the Iranian government when she believes that every person in the custody of the Americans is being tortured every day. I have seen plenty of pictures of the terrorists at Gitmo who have not been visibly injured or tortured. Does this mean we can put to bed the assumption that mass torture is occurring at Gitmo, or as Rosie refers to it- the secret CIA torture prison?

The Iranians allege the British soldiers were in Iranian water and had said that if the Brits say the soldiers were in Iranian water then the Iranians will let them go. Rosie is very cynical that Iran would just take these people into custody for no reason.

Thankfully, we have Elisabeth to try to enlighten the other women on the show. The Iranians might have taken these soldiers hostage in retaliation for the Iranians captured for distributing weapons in Iraq illegally or they may have done it because the UN is trying to pressure Iran to end their nuclear enrichment program.

Rosie pipes in about the “supposed” nuclear enrichment program because Iraq supposedly had a nuclear enrichment program as well.

Message to Rosie: No one disputes the fact that Iran is pursuing a nuclear enrichment program. Ahmadinejad has been very clear about Iran’s intentions and about his hope that Iran will someday be able to blow Israel off the map. This man should horrify Rosie yet she seems to think he is simply misunderstood.

On Iraq and the UN
Distracted by Rosie’s interjection, Elisabeth tries to throw out some reason regarding the war with Iraq by noting Iraq was in violation of 17 UN resolutions. Rosie’s response is to point out that the U.S. violated a single UN resolution by invading Iraq without UN permission.

Rosie asks “If we break the rules of the UN why should any other nation follow the rules of the UN?”

On this point I might agree: the UN is obsolete and has no ability to impose sanctions that seem to work. If only the United States and the rest of the world would ignore the UN.

Rosie continues with her irrational analysis of the situation: “If Iran really did take them and they really wanted to hold them hostage they would have done what they did in the Jimmy Carter error. … If they wanted to hold them, if this was a purposeful attack by the Iranian government to provoke an international incident why would they say we’ll let them go and we’re not going to harm them. We will let them go and we’re not going to harm them but you have to admit that you came into our waters.”

Is it possible for Rosie and her political advisors to be this ignorant? If the soldiers did nothing wrong, they shouldn’t admit to anything.

Iran is trying to get the British government to admit wrongdoing so that the statement can be shown again and again on Iranian television. The government wants to create propaganda to influence the people of Iran to hate and / or fear Britain and the United States.

On Going it "Alone"
Rosie questions: “It’s now Britain and the United States pretty much against the rest of the world. How did this happen?”

If only Rosie could understand that much of the world has no access to information about what is going on in Iran and Iraq, let alone their own countries. Very few countries are in a position to take any action of consequence. China is a communist country that is not necessarily invested in promoting freedom. While Russia is toying with ideas of capitalism, that country also has a long way to go before the people have economic and intellectual freedom. Many European countries have no interest in getting involved in issues related to the Middle East because they live in denial of the danger posed by Islamic fundamentalists.

Elisabeth tries to prod Rosie to clarify her position as to who is in the wrong: Rosie does a “These guys went here … Iran said that’s our water get out of our water…we’re taking you back…Britain says give us our guys… Iran says no you were in our water…say you’re in our water and we’ll give them back.” It seems so simple when Rosie does a little demonstration about how these soldiers crossed an imaginary line and then explains Iran had no choice but to take them…

Rosie then goes on to raise her question about the possibility that governments will fake or incite incidents to get them into wars?

Wink, wink, nod, nod. Our government must have plotted with England to set these soldiers and Iran up. Rosie has no trouble imaging this scenario. This goes back to her Gulf of Tonkin analogy that sunk like a lead balloon. Rosie seems driven to under cut the intentions of our government. She seems to assume corruption within the U.S. government from point one.

Both Joy and Rosie clearly stated that they hope that people around the world know that George Bush doesn’t represent the whole country. Rosie posits: “That’s right. I hope people across the world don’t think what George Bush is doing represents the American people cause the last election showed it does not.”

No one has been able to figure out exactly what the last elections meant but I doubt the average American’s views are in line with the ideology espoused by Rosie. Most of the elections across the country were close, some extremely close. If Democrats persist in this belief that they have some drastic mandate, they will regret it. The overreaching, which has clearly begun, will help George Bush and Republicans as they prepare for the 2008 elections.

Trusting Bush
Elisabeth raises a concern that many people are more likely to trust our enemies than our allies. Her point, while not succinct, seemed to be that people like Rosie O’Donnell would rather assume the worst about our government. It begs the question: Does all of the negative talk about the government create a surge of negativity that really does influence individuals to distrust the United States government collectively and individual politicians specifically?

Joy asserts that people should blame Bush for the problems facing the U.S. because he and his administration are responsible for the annihilation of all of our trust.

Rosie wants to know if Elisabeth trusts Bush as much today as when he first took office.

While Elisabeth tries to answer that in time of war the government has to do things it normally would not do Rosie has to interrupt with: “Nearly everyone in this administration is under indictment or suspicion…nearly every person from Karl Rove to Rumsfeld to Gonzales … what do you have to do to get impeached in this country?” (Committing a crime is generally required.)

Sadly, audience members clap for Rosie as she is breaking down in emotion.

Joy throws out “You have to have Monica Lewinsky come into your office.”

Elisabeth tries to point out that while people laugh and brush it aside, Clinton’s “enjoying himself” with Monica in the office, distracted him from the pursuit of Osama. This point always falls on deaf ears.

War on Everything and Everyone that Undermines America
Marcia Gay Harden says that using the language “War on Terror” is propaganda and she doesn’t like the wording. Come on now- calling it the “War on people who embrace fundamentalist Islam" is just too hard to say without taking a breath.

Even Joy recognizes Ahmadinejad is a bad guy- he wants to wipe Israel off the map…”

Rosie could hardly contain herself: “In America we are fed propaganda and if you want to know what is happening in the world go outside of the U.S. media because it is owned by four corporations. One of them is this one. And you know what go outside of this country to find out what is going on in our own country because it is frightening. It is frightening… Democracy is being threatened in a way it hasn’t been in two hundred years and if America doesn’t stand up we are in big trouble.”

In America, people have ready access to the Internet. There may be four major news stations, but Americans get their information from far more sources than those stations.  Good luck to anyone who leaves America in search of the truth.  Once in most of the other countries, the American will find that their access to information in America was superior.

If Rosie is so sure that Americans can not get news with diverse viewpoints here- how many newspapers are there in Iran? Who runs the paper in Iran? What about China? Russia? Saudi Arabia? How many countries in the world don’t have internet access readily available for its citizens?

On Capitalism
Marcia Gay Harden started a ridiculous discussion about the U.S. being founded on the notion of capitalism but today we have capitalism run amok. She tries to explain that in the early democracies there was a lot more about community and helping your neighborhood and your country. Now we are in an imperialistic stage. Today's capitalism does not reflect the ideologies of our forefathers.

I love when liberals pretend they care what our forefathers thought.  Is Roe v.Wade in line with their thinking.  What about the effort to drive all religion from the town square? What about pornography on the internet?  The examples go on and on.

Also, in the days of our forefathers, neighbors didn't think they had a right to each others property, people who could work did work, and people generally took responsibility for their own lives.

Capitalists are not the problem in America.  America's growing problem: more and more people take without giving and take because they feel entitled, not because they have an absolute need.

On 9/11 and the War in Iraq
Rosie: Do you think the government purposely misled the American people to believe Iraq had something to do with 9/11?

Elisabeth said no. A few people clapped Rosie says “Yes said the crowd.”

Elisabeth asks Rosie if she believes that our government had something to do with 9/11.

Rosie: No but I do think it is the first time in history that fire melted steel. She believes that it defies physics that Building 7 collapsed without explosives being involved. How she thinks the government quickly planted explosives in building 7 is beyond me but...

Rosie is going to get a physics expert to come on the show to explain everything to Elisabeth and the American people. I can't wait for the physics expert from Harvard to enlighten all of us about the rules of Physics. 

What will Rosie say if the expert they bring in tells her the building really could have collapse?  Stay tuned...

In the course of today's discussion, Rosie again asserted her belief that Bush should be impeached.  This situation with Gonzales and his aides is further proof, to her, of the President's bad behavior.

Rosie's hate for Bush and her need to criticize every thing he does is a disservice to her viewers.  She can not see the trees in the forest because she has a pre-determined view of what should happen.

She asserts that if there isn't enough to impeach Bush now, she doesn't know what it will take.

Rosie, it takes high crimes or misdemeanors.  Google it.

 

March 28, 2007

Today, the women were all over Gonzales because one of his aides, Monica Goodling, will invoke the Fifth at Senate hearings.

Rosie supports her taking the Fifth because she believes the Bush administration is making everyone else pay for their crimes, like in Abu Ghraib. Rosie is very sympathetic because she understands the evils this woman faces at the hands of the Republicans.

I have news for Rosie: this woman is not afraid of George Bush or the Republicans. This woman knows the democrats want top punish every conservative in Washington and will stop at nothing to get the justice they have predetermined needs to be delivered. This woman fears the Democrats.

Goodling would be a fool to answer any questions before the Senate. No one should agree to testify because there will be no end to this.

Elisabeth tries to explain what is happening in Washington: the witch hunts have begun. She talks as fast as she can because she knows she never gets to talk for long. She reminds us that the president has the right to fire these people for any reason.

I would agree the Administration botched this whole situation. They should have never said a word about why any of the U.S. Attorneys were terminated. Gonzales handled the situation badly and then just kept digging.

Joy brought up Patrick Fitzgerald- he was on the list to be terminated in 2005 and the administration decided to keep him on staff. What a mistake that was in hindsight.

Rosie acknowledges that the President can get rid of these people, but she does not think he can cherry pick the ones he likes. Rosie, that is the point of serving at the pleasure of the President: he can cherry pick. He should cherry pick. Obviously, the solution going forward is for the President to immediately terminate all U.S. Attorneys and replace the bad and the good with people the President believes will be supportive of the President’s agenda and pursue those cases the President wants pursued.

Thank God for the Fifth Amendment. Good lock Monica!

Texas Legislation to give pregnant women $500 to not have an abortion.

Elizabeth takes a pro-life position saying that if this helps a woman make it through her pregnancy, great.

Rosie of course can’t support this reasoning because there are 500,000 children in foster care and fewer than 200,000 licensed foster homes in the country. Her point: people shouldn’t bring unwanted children into this world.

Rosie: Please don’t compare foster children, who have often been abused and exposed to situations most people can not imagine to babies being put up for adoption. Children do not end up in foster care because they were nurtured. Additionally, many children in foster care are members of sibling groups, so the young children who haven’t been harmed to the same degree as their siblings will not escape the system because of the efforts to keep siblings together.

The children in the foster care system who do not get adopted are often older. Many children in foster care have behavioral, educational or health issues that create barriers to adoption. Also, many of these children have been sexually abused which creates a potentially dangerous situation for other children in the home.

I am a foster/adoptive parent and can say her comments are very disingenuous. Few people should take on the responsibilities of caring for children from the foster care system. While all kids are needy, these kids almost always need intensive intervention. Rosie has a great support system to help her with her kids. She has the resources to get her kids anything they need. Additionally, she adopted younger kids out of the system who will generally have fewer issues.

If Rosie really wants to help the kids who end up in foster care, she should start to speak out about removing kids much faster from their abusive, drug addicted parents, terminating parental rights and closing the records to prevent abusive biological families from maintaining contact.

Rosie should also encourage her friends from Hollywood and New York to look into adopting these kids instead of jetting to Africa. Her friends could afford to provide for these children, who again have more intensive needs than the average baby put immediately up for adoption.

To the legislator in Texas: Kudos to you for introducing legislation that calls attention to this issue.

Couric has come under scrutiny after her interview with John and Elizabeth Edwards. She apparently wasn’t nice enough. Wow, I was impressed Couric actually asked some actual questions.

Couric challenged their decision by asking pointed, difficult questions.

J. Edwards feigned shock when Couric suggested he was putting work before family. Work is what he did as lawyer. Being President wouldn’t be work, it would be service.

The women of the View seemed very impressed by this obviously rehearsed response. If Edwards doesn’t think he will be “working” as President he definitely has no business in the office.

Couric asked the hard questions and she put the dilemma in proper perspective.

The View perspective: Couric faced the same situation and she kept working.

ROSIE, JOY and ELIZABETH: Couric was not on the campaign trail- she was a newscaster with flexibility in her job. She was home every day with her family, supporting her husband. Her husband, who actually had the cancer, was with his kids. Couric was not the person who was going to die.

The women then suggest that McCain’s skin cancer and Giuliani’s prostate cancer are the equivalent of E. Edwards’s metastasized cancer. They suggest that there is a double standard at play because people don’t have concerns about the men in the race that actually had cancer.

Remember when Rudy got out of the Senate race when he was diagnosed because he didn’t know how his cancer story was going to play out. Now he knows his cancer is “cured”. I would bet good money that if Rudy’s cancer came back, he would be out.

McCain has had skin cancer. No one has suggested the occasional removal of skin cancer will result in his untimely death. There is no double standard here. Do not compare apples to oranges.

In the end, the Couric interview was simply good practice for the John and Elizabeth Edwards. After all, Joy observed, the republicans are much more insensitive than Katie Couric could ever be.