PDA

View Full Version : LA Times Editorial: The 'queen of nice' goes nuts


Joytown
3rd April 2007, 12:27 PM
From today's LA Times Editorial Section. The only part that bothers me here is that all 9/11 Nutcases seem to be painted with the "liberal" brush at the end.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-goldberg3apr03,0,7709236.column?coll=la-opinion-rightrail

The 'queen of nice' goes nuts
Rosie O'Donnell's wacky 9/11 conspiracy theories should get her kicked off 'The View.'
April 3, 2007
Jonah Goldberg


RENOWNED metallurgist Rosie O'Donnell proclaimed on TV on Thursday that Sept. 11, 2001, was a more significant date than most of us realized. It was, in her words, "the first time in history that fire has ever melted steel."

This, of course, came as news to steelworkers, blacksmiths, firefighters, manufacturers of samurai swords and other fools who hadn't realized that steel is forged in magic furnaces using dragon breath and pixie dust.

O'Donnell made this and other profoundly stupid comments on the daytime talk show "The View," ABC's update of the ancient practice of women chattering around the village well.

The former "queen of nice" seems to think that the show is the perfect venue to audition as grand marshal for the next tinfoil hat parade. And if you visit O'Donnell's website (www.rosie.com), you'll find her application's supporting materials: all sorts of unadulterated moonbattery presented in the Esperanto of global derangement — a form of instant-message-style free verse. For example, she writes about the British sailors held prisoner in Iran:

the british did it on purpose

into iranian waters

as

US MILITARY BUILD UP ON

THE IRANIAN BORDER

we will be in iran

before summer

as planned

come on people

u have 2 c

i know u can

You may be unfamiliar with such psych-ward stylings, but I get e-mail written like this all the time. Perhaps if you believe the jackbooted thugs are at your door, it's reasonable to think you don't have time to spell out your words.

Anyway, in last week's rant, O'Donnell focused on World Trade Center Building 7, which has become the grassy knoll for 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Asked if the government was responsible for its collapse, she coyly replied that she didn't know. All she knows is that it's "impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved" and that, for the "first time in history, steel was melted by fire." Wink, wink. For the record, fire can melt steel, and buildings also collapse when heat weakens steel. But that misses the point. The point is we shouldn't have to argue with crazy people.

Regardless, it appears that not even the heat of ridicule can weaken O'Donnell's steely resolve to make an idiot of herself.

You know what? That's fine. Normally we expect such outbursts from the poor souls who rage against unseen threats at bus stations and public libraries. But even the rich and famous have a right to mutter inanities, shout non sequiturs or shriek possum recipes.

But ABC isn't obliged to give O'Donnell a nationally televised platform. Barbara Walters, the matriarch of "The View" and its executive producer, is supposed to be a titan of American journalism. She has all the awards any broadcast journalist could ever want. But today she knowingly gives a soapbox to a wacko.

Walters and ABC no doubt will seek comfort in any number of rationalizations, from gooey platitudes about free speech to the glories of diverse opinion to the fundamental unseriousness of Café Vienna-moment television. And yes, human train wrecks make for good ratings — which is why O'Donnell may get another $40 million before her "View" contract expires in June.

Granted, "The View" isn't "60 Minutes," so why should we care that much if the girl talk gets a little silly? After all, Walters has spent much of her career muddying the distinction between entertainment and hard news, what with her saccharine "What kind of tree would you be?" interviews.

Yet there is a difference between taking silly topics seriously and being silly about serious stuff. When you discuss hair-care products or lavish weddings, the subject telegraphs its own triviality. Walters may risk her journalistic reputation when she jibber-jabbers about such things, but that ship sailed long ago. It's another thing entirely when ABC's most venerated on-air journalist gives a megaphone to someone who frets that poor Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was railroaded, who insinuates that the U.S. government had a hand in any part of 9/11 and who insists Elvis Presley is alive and living on an island with Bruce Lee (OK, I made that last one up).

But so far, O'Donnell has gotten a pass because she isn't a mere wacko but a left-wing wacko. If O'Donnell sounded like Pat Robertson, the network would call in the butterfly net almost immediately. But because O'Donnell's crazy accusations are directed rightward at that evil George W. Bush, it's considered forgivable excess.

So come on ABC, for your own credibility, send her someplace where she won't be a harm to herself or anybody else, someplace with rubber sporks.

u have 2 c

i know u can

========================

-jon

T.A.M.
3rd April 2007, 12:33 PM
excellent piece.

TAM:)

rwguinn
3rd April 2007, 12:37 PM
From today's LA Times Editorial Section. The only part that bothers me here is that all 9/11 Nutcases seem to be painted with the "liberal" brush at the end.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-goldberg3apr03,0,7709236.column?coll=la-opinion-rightrail
<<copy snipped>
-jon
Actually, the piece refers to "Left-Wing Wacko's"
No mention of Liberals in there at all.
And the fact that Rosie is the darling of some definitely "Right-Wing Wacko's" --and vice-versa, makes the distinction a little indistinct, don't you think?
An indistinct distinction. Sounds...CTish, somehow...
Oh, well. Carry on.

A W Smith
3rd April 2007, 12:46 PM
Queen of nice? when was she ever the queen of nice?
Thats sarcasm right?

Myriad
3rd April 2007, 01:21 PM
Queen of nice? when was she ever the queen of nice?
Thats sarcasm right?


Perhaps they meant rice, spice, lice, vice, mice, dice, ice, or bad advice.

Respectfully,
Myriad

uk_dave
3rd April 2007, 01:57 PM
Jonah Goldberg huh?

nine9!!!!111111eleventy!!!11111

Walk The Line
3rd April 2007, 02:10 PM
Queen of nice? when was she ever the queen of nice?
Thats sarcasm right?

That was what she was called when she on "The Rosie O'Donnell Show" (A talk shows that lasted from 1996-2002). Towards the beginning the title was more applicable, as the show's start coincided with the height of popularity for the Jerry Springer type of talk show. As time wore on, she became less nice and more confrontational, and had several notable spats with guests on the show (such as Tom Selleck about gun control). Eventually, the show was canceled and the aura of "The Queen of Nice" was lost.

I'm disturbed I know this.

ktesibios
3rd April 2007, 03:41 PM
The two should not be confused. An editorial is written by a newspaper's editorial staff and reflects the paper's "official" position; an op-ed is the work of an independent columnist and reflects only a private opinion.

So, predictably, and just like Rosie, Doughy Pantload (Goldberg's nickname in the liberal blogsphere) spews out an opinion based on ideology rather than on the unbiased study of reality and also seizes the opportunity to try to slag by extension anyone who isn't a devotee of his particular brand of political Kool-Aid. Meanwhile trying to play that old "liberals always get away with persecuting us" tune.

:s2:

As far as I'm concerned, Doughy and Rosie are made for each other. An ideologue is an ideologue; all the rest is mere commentary.

firecoins
3rd April 2007, 04:26 PM
She is considered a left wing wacko because she is a liberal and because she believes in the 9/11 conspiracy b.s. Understandably there are right wingers who agree with the conspiracy b.s. as well but that is where the similarities end. If Hillary wins or some other democrat, you'll see Rosie leave the 9/11 stuff alone.

Matthew Best
3rd April 2007, 04:36 PM
If Hillary wins or some other democrat, you'll see Rosie leave the 9/11 stuff alone.

Why would she? She could still blame it on the right/Repubs/Military Industrial Complex/[insert bug a boo here], despite the fact that the Dems would be in power.

Brainster
3rd April 2007, 05:33 PM
Why would she? She could still blame it on the right/Repubs/Military Industrial Complex/[insert bug a boo here], despite the fact that the Dems would be in power.

Because 9-11 Denial is not about 9-11, just as Holocaust Denial is not about the Holocaust. 9-11 Denial is about getting rid of Bush; Holocaust Denial is about getting rid of Israel (or America's support for Israel).

ktesibios, referring to Jonah Goldberg as Doughy Pantload is brilliant. For a third-grader.

Thunder
3rd April 2007, 09:36 PM
"Jonah Goldberg"? He must be a Zionist. Probably planted the thermite himself. Has anyone checked his Odigo records? Done any furniture moving in NJ?

=)

Kent1
4th April 2007, 09:44 AM
http://www.stoprosie.com/#sign
Looks like someone else REALLY does not like her.
Over 11,000 sigs and growing quickly
Her blog is also currently open again to comments.
http://www.rosie.com/blog/sections/ask-ro/

Moochie
4th April 2007, 01:46 PM
First Oprah and her shilling for The Secret, now Rosie and her WT7 crapola. What is it with these morons?

M.

Donal
4th April 2007, 02:31 PM
Is this the same Rosie that said kids don't need to learn math in school anymore because they have calculators and computers?

Is this the same Rosie that said they don't need to teach history in school anymore because kids can use the internet?

The same Rosie that ambushed Tom seleck on her show because he was an NRA member, but whose personal security all carry automatic weapons?

The same Rosie that faked fawning over Tom Cruise when in fact she was a fat, angry lesbian?

uk_dave
4th April 2007, 02:51 PM
.....angry lesbian?

I'm scared already. :eek:

Brainache
5th April 2007, 04:43 AM
Is this the same Rosie that said kids don't need to learn math in school anymore because they have calculators and computers?

Is this the same Rosie that said they don't need to teach history in school anymore because kids can use the internet?

The same Rosie that ambushed Tom seleck on her show because he was an NRA member, but whose personal security all carry automatic weapons?

The same Rosie that faked fawning over Tom Cruise when in fact she was a fat, angry lesbian?

Yes, yes it is.

Also the same Rosie who ridiculed Donald Trump because he is rich, powerful and gets to sleep with beautiful women despite having a stupid haircut. Jealousy is a bitch, but she could at least do something about her hair.

chillzero
5th April 2007, 05:12 AM
Queen of nice? when was she ever the queen of nice?
Thats sarcasm right?

Well, I am assuming she is no 'Renowned metallurgist' either ;)

Big Les
5th April 2007, 08:39 AM
I (as someone who most Americans would call a liberal) see nothing wrong with that piece at all; the liberal bit was meant to point out that if she were a right-wing nutjob as opposed to a left-wing nutjob, she would be given less latitude. I tend to agree; it's OK, fashionable, and even encouraged to be anti-Bush, anti-conservative and anti-America (at least here in Britain), and I agree with some of those sentiments (re Iraq notably). This does give more leeway to one extreme than it does the other, arguably.

Matthew Best
5th April 2007, 09:44 AM
Because 9-11 Denial is not about 9-11, just as Holocaust Denial is not about the Holocaust. 9-11 Denial is about getting rid of Bush.

Great! So as soon as Bush leaves office, all this 9/11 nonsense will disappear, right?

Brainster
5th April 2007, 10:38 AM
Great! So as soon as Bush leaves office, all this 9/11 nonsense will disappear, right?

Most of it. You'll still have Alex Jones and some of the folks who think the Democrats are in on the plot too. But they'll have a lot harder time getting traction. Of course, if a Republican wins, especially McCain or Giuliani....