and maybe still does. VERY troubled childhood and life.

Trump is not nut's,he created himself in the image of PT Barnum with a bit of Dale Carnage. Total Bullshit Con Artist.

Certainly, when Donnie first emerged on the scene, it was as a self-promoting, bullying con artist. However, at his current advanced age, he may have developed significant cognitive impairment as well. If you look at his old video clips, he was at least able to express himself in coherent sentences with reasonably-developed vocabulary — not the rambling, simple-words-only communication that caused one parent of a Santa Fe H.S. victim to liken it to talking to a toddler.

As someone who remembers how the gang of Joe McCarthy,and Roy Cohn operated. Trump is a imitation of these nasty bastards with Barnum tossed in for glimmer. Know the threats first hand from Joe McCarthy towards his detractors growing up in Wisconsin during and after WW 2. Trump operates in the sawme manner.

He is not Stupid,very cunning and manipulative.

Saw the piece from the Mother yesterday,sounds very familiar to what others have said. Remember,this sucker has no soul. His personality is that of a Cold Blooded Killer.

Because there is certainly more Carnage in Trump than there is Carnegie!

Stupid Dyslexia .

Dyslexia never goes completely away,one just learns to deal with it. It does produce some interesting sentence structure and word spellings.

Still a pain in the butt.

we use the wrong word, BUT IT WAS SPELLED RIGHT!

But,hey we keep on keeping on.

Now that retirement is finally taking hold,don't have reread Instruction manuals two or three times. He he,males reading instructions. Oxymoron.

played w/ the digital camera. ignored book. like higher math. NO WANT!

continue but with out her in it. Her co-stars like the idea (Sara Gilbert and John Goodman). So does Michael Moore.

die during knee surgery
self driving Uber kills her off

Too much drama and intrigue for Roseanne's audience?

Run over by a bus.

recently dead.

If that happens, please make sure I get the royalties. I already have a lead shot in my mind and a final scene that could be worked in each show.

Or she could be raptured.

Although we have never met, I think I know you. You are a secular Irish Catholic pro-Vatican II, Michigan working class, union supporting, Democratic Socialist. So far, we are equal.

You have a big heart. You are very forgiving. I give you much credit for your ability to forgive. (I, for one, have not forgiven you for the 2000 election and never will, but that's my problem, not yours).

I know that your defense of Roseanne and the Roseanne show was brought out of love for both your friend and the people you believe she represents. I believe that working class America is your inspiration and the source of all of your energetic advocacy for serveral decades.

The Roseanne Show does, indeed, reflect the sufferings of the white working class pretty well. (At least the old show did). But I also believe, that the current show was produced, in great part, to JUSTIFY Trump voters. When we watch their pain (Roseanne's bad knee, for example), we are to feel the outrage that she cannot get her knee surgery after years of hard work. We are also supposed to feel that her pain is GREATER THAN that of OTHER PEOPLE, who, in the Trump voter world, do not work. In the Trump White Working Class World, there is no black, brown or Asian working class. There are no minorities working in hospitals, driving buses, working as cashiers. Also, too (nod to our other WWC heroine Sarah Palin) white people who work, work SO HARD that they almost always need opioids and they very often become addicted because of the PAIN from their VERY VERY HARD WORK, UNLIKE UNWORTHY OTHERS WHO WILL NOT BE MENTIONED DURING FAMILY HOURS ON TV (whose doctors refuse to prescribe them pain medication since they may have once lived in a neighborhood where drugs were sold, so opioids are reserved for the DESERVING PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO BECOME ADDICTED).

We are supposed to watch that show and at the end of the episode, FORGIVE, as you have, Michael, the members of your race who voted for a vicious and evil racist. The Plan to Restore Respect to Trump Voters would work oh-so-perfectly if only (!) no one on the show says anything racist or misogynistic or homophobic. If only.

If only Roseanne had kept her hateful comments to herself. Alas, the white working class heroine, who has actually NOT WORKED as a waitress or truck driver or cashier more than 50 years, is elitist enough now to think that she can drop the "ape" word on just about any accomplished African American WOMAN (as a woman, I am not forgetting that part) without giving one thought to the mixed race child who works on her show, or to the hundreds of extras, camera man, grips (whatever that is) who feed their (95% majority white) families. Because she's Roseanne and fuck everyone else.

She signed up to do a family show on a FAMILY network shown during FAMILY HOUR for a company that is owned by Mickey Mouse for the love of God (as your and my mother, father, aunts and uncles would say)(alternatively: for Christ's sake or just CRIPES).

Let me give Roseanne a little White Working Class pep talk (i.e., not much pep and damn near very little talk):

1. Quit cryin' or I'll give you something to cry about (like the unemployment line you gave your cameraman and extras)
2. Get off your duff
3. Quit feeling sorry for yourself.
4. Get a job.
3. No one owes you a living.
4. Shut your trap (pie hole if from Ohio)
6. (From our mothers): If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.

7. From my Dad (oldest of 7 children; grew up in Detroit in Great Depression; father, union printer; WWII vet):
"We don't use those words in this house."

When Roseanne says she is sorry for violating our homes and our people with that ugly word, I'll start working on foregiveness.

Thank you..




January 8,2018

"This shouldn’t be much of a surprise, as Barr has been known to publically support the president".

"During the panel, Barr said that the main reason she couldn’t vote for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election was “because of Haiti” and that her children have taken away her Twitter access. She stresses that she didn’t want her own political personality “to overshadow the show.”
https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2018/01/roseanne-abc-television-critics-association-2018.html

Thank you for the great citations to WWC and BWC shows. You are right. Michael Moore did some contortions to stay on Roseanne’s good side.

When I was complaining how "life isn't fair."

He told me "Whatever hits the fan is not going to be distributed evenly."

(and true)

having taken in Holocaust survivors?
Her sister Geraldine wrote a book about their relationship years ago maybe if true she mentioned it?
If this is something that she told Michael and there's no confirmation from her parents about it I find it highly questionable,this is Roseanne, the same woman who accused her father of molesting her while growing up and then molesting her daughter on the day she married Tom Arnold.
She blamed the incest for being overweight, smoking packs of cigarettes daily, drugs and alcohol, yada-yada.
After she goes into media madness telling the world about her father, humiliating them beyond comprehension and breaks her parents hearts,destroys the family then one day decides oh, I made a mistake..silly me.

I don't believe anything that comes out of her mouth and find her disgusting and an attention whore.
No sympathy from this gal, head injury or not.

I question the whole story. Her false stories about her father would make me question anything she says

to sing the National Anthem at his rallies, she can screech like the harpy that she is, grab her crotch and spit...and Trump can boast about the size of the crowd and the TV ratings.

They deserve each other.

filled rant.

As for Moore, I wasn't happy with him at all during the 2016 election, especially after Hillary won the nomination. He went out of his way to be a demoralizing asshole, who went out of his way to undermine Hillary and the Democratic party every chance he got.

What really was the straw that broke the camels back for me though was his behavior during the WOMEN'S march on Washington, where as far as he was concerned it was all about HIM and bashing Democrats, NOT women's rights with WHOME THE MARCH WAS ABOUT.

I am so done with Michael Moore, the guy who supported Ralph Nader in 2000.

As contemporary of Roseanne's growing up in Salt Lake, some of this is crap does not match my memory. I remember hospitalizations for mental illness, not brain injuries. And I remember a reputation as a very mean person.

by making things up. I guess with both being liars it explains why they like each other.

talk show back in 1998. Here's that part of this Nov 7, 2016 Amy Goodman interview.

because all three are aversion therapy, but you made me curious enough to.

Destructive dissenters, who promote dissidence and discord because that's how they're wired, need to be recognized for what they are.

Dissension against the Democratic Party isn't just Michael Moore's schtick, but literally Bernie Sanders' excuse for a separate political existence. Where would either be if he admitted Sanders' campaign positions were the Democratic Party's and that the party represented the people? Poof!

Trump's in the White House and McConnell and Ryan running congress because egoisticical jerks like this can't be honest and can't resist acting out.

like Jill Stein and "Our Revolution" that things have to be destroyed in order for people to "see the light". Of course when you do that, the TRUE "vulnerable" (women, POC) get wiped out, and that leaves that "perpetually aggrieved group" that he is a member of, with all the bounty. Mission Accomplished.

I was initially interested in Sanders because he wants to destroy the billionaire classes, and I think that's a critical objective.

But almost immediately I realized he was trying to form a coalition of destructive populist resentments from the right wing tea-party types and the left, and that was like a stage full of huge red flags waiting for their emblem to be revealed. How many democracies has that coalition destroyed?

It was also horribly obvious that, if he was somehow able to weaken the Democratic Party through his "revolution," those who used that to take power would be the very ones he so foolishly imagined he could take on by himself.

After all, they formed and directed the tea party, supposedly a rebellion against themselves (!), to take power. Trump was another right-wing rebellion against them, which they've also used to accrue a great deal more power. Sanders is hopelessly outmatched and has no idea. He's far too emotionally invested in trying to take down the Democratic leadership to worry about what'd happen if he succeeded.

And Moore? As you say.

that Steve Bannon is using around Europe at the moment (and that he used while he was in the WH).

It is a "tactic" that is actually "apolitical" and there is a belief that somehow when you do it, the outcome will be "different", but it usually never is. It leaves a lot of bitterness and anger in its wake.

lead into something they never expected. Angry fools being used to destroy an amorphous "the establishment" without any guarantee of what would replace it. One thing we know forsure, good leaders wouldn't have chosen persecuting Jews as a way of harnessing and feeding populist angers then, and good leaders wouldn't feed anger against refugees now.

Speaking of destruction, Trump actually said this back in 2014 on Fox, sounding like he was channeling Bannon, who he already knew.

you mention about being a "political scientist" and that was my mother's major in college and she did very actively follow politics for decades as I was growing up. However she never lived long enough to see the result of the 2016 election (she passed in 2015) but I always wondered what her take would have been on what is going on now. I expect she would have noted that "everything goes in cycles" and "nothing is new under the sun". She grew up during the Depression and much of her early life was under Roosevelt and she always drove home the point about why Roosevelt got elected again and again.

When we first got cable back in 1989, the first channel she was waiting to took at was CNN (and their original Headline News) and the second was CSPAN.... and she was definitely a CSPAN junkie, especially once we finally got CSPAN2 and then CSPAN3.

She would dutifully tune in to the various WH Press Secretary briefings over that time and I still wonder what the heck she would make of Sarah Hucklebee-Sanders who is so diametrically opposed to anything bearing a sense of sanity. Given that my mom considered previous ones like Dana Perino or Tony Snow masterful bullshit artists (and she even felt the same about Stephanopolis and Gibbs), and probably would have dismissed Spicer, I can't even fathom what she would have thought about what is happening right now other than a "history repeats itself" moment.

when she was still following? I've been wondering if the rise of ultrawealthy classes able to use IT against the electorate may have managed to interrupt or delay the cycle back toward liberalism after the conservative wave that ended the New Deal era. 2010 midterms, red states, Obama, then this.

How great to have an educated mind evaluating and knowing what was significant and not. Outside the cable groupthink. I was a CSPAN junkie in the early years, no doubt watching at the same time but missing a great deal. She sure saw a lot over the last century.

But this history is a repetition? Please tell me of what so I can know it ends okay.

She wore out a couple VCRs doing it too.

Remember that no matter what the means of communication, it's still "propaganda" and that is another point that she would drive home. Your mention of "IT" is really just the format, no matter what type of communications - whether newspapers/magazines, or radio, or television/movies (she used to talk about "Movietone News" ) or youtube - it's the content that does the "influencing".

Remember that in the '30s, the "progressives" were what was left of the Lincoln/Teddy Roosevelt Republican party and Franklin Roosevelt was an outlier of sorts who managed to convince quite a few to vote Democratic over and over during the depth of the Depression after the market crashed with no safety net, where help was promised and delivered (OASDI - "Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance" - i.e., "Social Security" ). And it was to the point that at one time (I think ~1936?), Democrats had reached 75 seats in the Senate. If Roosevelt had survived his 4th term, he would have been elected again. But as we know, a Constitutional Amendment was then put in place to limit Presidential terms.

If you look at humankind historically - there will always be "robber barons" (monarchies, upper classes). That will never go away. It has been part of human nature for thousands upon thousands of years. The "barons" of the Roosevelt era were the Rockefellers, the Hearsts, the Astors, Howard Hughes, etc. The difference in some cases is whether those "upper classes" allowed for a "civil service" or other "work force" ("middle class" ) to exist. Those that didn't fell "quickly" (in relative terms). Roosevelt was one such "baron" who realized this.

I think we are going through a real anomaly historically - not to the degree of what happened that lead to an actual Civil War in the 1860s, but nonetheless, a period where we are drowning in "modern" propaganda. And because there are so many means for that to reach people, it is amplified, and sometimes you have to step back from it and clear your head and realize what it is. Otherwise you can obsess and not be able to function enough to do something about it. I do know that is something that she would say continually too... This stuff is designed to make you react and feel exactly the way you do - frustrated, demoralized, angry. And it's the type of thing they used to do by dropping leaflets over villages in other countries (and in some cases still do), except the "leaflets" are now "tweets".

IMHO, I think there will be a "backlash" to the current "backlash". It's like physics. "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction". Heck, no one ever expected Democrats to retake the House in 2006 after being out of power for 12 years.