Roseanne Reboot

[ronburgundy]

Correct. And the one's who want to be fooled and given deniability (however implausible) are corporate sponsors, backers, or sellers to white supremacist organizations with supremacist fanbases like the Fox News, Breitbart, the Trump Campaign, the GOP, NASCAR, the NFL, Duck Dynasty, Joe Rogan, etc.

It is not about actually fooling anyone but about putting enough lipstick on their racist pig selves so that their corporate sponsors can have an excuse to look the other way, and about their fanbases using the pseudo-libertarian rhetoric so they can wrap their bigotries in a veneer of patriotism which is pretty much the #1 use of patriotism.

You forgot CNN, MSNBC, the Democratic Party, etc. Sometimes it seems the only ones not in on the game are libertarians themselves.

No, none of those are fooled into thinking that these bigots are actually libertarians. Most actual libertarians are more aligned with the Democrats than the GOP, they just don't use the label "libertarian" because they don't want to be associated with the right wing bigots who have coopted the term.

These days, a person claiming to be a libertarian or voting for the "Libertarian" party is a sign that they actually are not one.

 

[Bronzeage]

Correct. And the one's who want to be fooled and given deniability (however implausible) are corporate sponsors, backers, or sellers to white supremacist organizations with supremacist fanbases like the Fox News, Breitbart, the Trump Campaign, the GOP, NASCAR, the NFL, Duck Dynasty, Joe Rogan, etc.

It is not about actually fooling anyone but about putting enough lipstick on their racist pig selves so that their corporate sponsors can have an excuse to look the other way, and about their fanbases using the pseudo-libertarian rhetoric so they can wrap their bigotries in a veneer of patriotism which is pretty much the #1 use of patriotism.

You forgot CNN, MSNBC, the Democratic Party, etc. Sometimes it seems the only ones not in on the game are libertarians themselves.

No, none of those are fooled into thinking that these bigots are actually libertarians. Most actual libertarians are more aligned with the Democrats than the GOP, they just don't use the label "libertarian" because they don't want to be associated with the right wing bigots who have coopted the term.

These days, a person claiming to be a libertarian or voting for the "Libertarian" party is a sign that they actually are not one.

You've discovered a way to detect Heisenberg's Libertarian.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Whatever.

I'm still not sure why I'm supposed to be raising a fuss over this cancellation, other than people telling me I should be raising a fuss over this. Nor can I exactly determine why some people are reacting with glee unless I make assumptions about motives that I don't want to make.

 

[Playball40]

Gee, a Trump voter turned out to be a piece of shit racist?

No!

You don't say!

I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you! Can't you see how shocked I am? This is my shocked face.

I can't wait for the other conservatives and libertarians (who are completely different, but just happen to take the same positions on most things) to rush to her defense and claim that she is being "attacked" by "social justice warriors."

Gee, a libertarian commented about how he was disappointed that he'd never know how a particular plot point came out. And here comes underseer to tell us that he wants libertarians to join him in his conservative outrage instead.

Actually I really feel sorry for Sarah Gilbert. I heard that she is the one that got the show back together, and I really liked seeing her on screen. Yeah, she's showing her years, but she's still damn hot. Too bad she plays for the other team.

And why is that "too bad"?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Whatever.

I'm still not sure why I'm supposed to be raising a fuss over this cancellation, other than people telling me I should be raising a fuss over this. Nor can I exactly determine why some people are reacting with glee unless I make assumptions about motives that I don't want to make.

Rosanne's tweets were not just racist. But were also deeply personal and uncivil. And she has a long history of such behavior. And those executives that help reboot the show knew that. It was not like her tweets were in some gray area. Barr reached own as low and as inflammatory as possible. The people she attacked in no way deserved this level of incivility and animosity. It is not really that unknown. Glenn Beck went over the top and lost his program on Fox. Alex Jones will never get a program on any cable network and is advertiser toxic.

 

[braces_for_impact]

I actually find it an interesting phenomenon. This personality "type" or "mentality" for lack of a better word, that seems more and more common these days, although I suspect we see them more merely because mass communication has allowed them to have better visibility.

I notice so often conspiracy theory and racism/anti-semitism go hand in hand. Also, a weird preponderance for dwelling on certain conspiracy type details...like the George Soros thing for example that occupies so much time of the far right conspiracy nuts. It's perplexing.

 

[repoman]

Whatever.

I'm still not sure why I'm supposed to be raising a fuss over this cancellation, other than people telling me I should be raising a fuss over this. Nor can I exactly determine why some people are reacting with glee unless I make assumptions about motives that I don't want to make.

Rosanne's tweets were not just racist. But were also deeply personal and uncivil. And she has a long history of such behavior. And those executives that help reboot the show knew that. It was not like her tweets were in some gray area. Barr reached own as low and as inflammatory as possible. The people she attacked in no way deserved this level of incivility and animosity. It is not really that unknown. Glenn Beck went over the top and lost his program on Fox. Alex Jones will never get a program on any cable network and is advertiser toxic.

What about the high level of otherworldly inaccurate information in her tweets as well? Stuff that can be easily checked...

If you are going to make a conspiracy theory at least have component parts that are real and have fun trying to put them together in nonsensical ways.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Whatever.

I'm still not sure why I'm supposed to be raising a fuss over this cancellation, other than people telling me I should be raising a fuss over this. Nor can I exactly determine why some people are reacting with glee unless I make assumptions about motives that I don't want to make.

Rosanne's tweets were not just racist. But were also deeply personal and uncivil. And she has a long history of such behavior. And those executives that help reboot the show knew that. It was not like her tweets were in some gray area. Barr reached own as low and as inflammatory as possible. The people she attacked in no way deserved this level of incivility and animosity. It is not really that unknown. Glenn Beck went over the top and lost his program on Fox. Alex Jones will never get a program on any cable network and is advertiser toxic.

Okay, that explains outrage over the tweet. But I'm told that I'm supposed to be outraged over the cancellation, which I don't understand.

Okay, I'm miffed that I won't find out how the DJ storyline ended, but not enough to call it outrage.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Websites are full of click-bait articles, why this or that celebrity is no longer cast in Hollywood, no longer able to get parts on TV shows, no longer has a career in the big time entertainment industry. People who had the characters in TV shows they played killed off to get rid of them. People who are assholes, impossible to work with, whose personal behavior is so deplorable nobody wants to have anything to do with them. Barr just joined a large crowd. Surely, having been in show business for a long, long time, she knew about all of these pariahs, and yet, didn't get a clue. There are many ways in the entertainment world to become a pariah, and she found a way to join that zoo. After reflecting on these many click-bait tell-alls, it is obvious that Barr's fall from grace and gainful employment is not a rare occurrence, just one of the most loud and obnoxious falls. Apparently careful and insightful thinking is not one of her strong points.

 

[ZiprHead]

Whatever.

I'm still not sure why I'm supposed to be raising a fuss over this cancellation, other than people telling me I should be raising a fuss over this. Nor can I exactly determine why some people are reacting with glee unless I make assumptions about motives that I don't want to make.

Who is saying you have to raise a fuss? Is it in the libertarian rule book that you have to comment on stuff you don't give a shit about?

 

[Patooka]

Who is saying you have to raise a fuss? Is it in the libertarian rule book that you have to comment on stuff you don't give a shit about?

I was under the impression that not caring about what doesn't harm you is about as libertarian as you could get. Maybe being libertarian is like buying a Fisher-Price "My first political opinion" and giving it a spin. Whilst they are certainly against a lot of things, they don't really stand for a lot of things either.

 

[RavenSky]

Called that one right. She now says she was on Ambien at the time.

It's amazing how conservatives are all for personal responsibility until something affects them and then all of the responsibility suddenly becomes due to everything except them personally.

Also, I guess this means that she's been constantly on Ambien for the past decade or so.

The makers of Ambien just tweeted "While all pharmaceutical treatments have side effects, racism is not a known side effect of any Sanofi medication."

And Dictionary.com tweeted:

The name Ambien is thought to come from the word "ambient" or similar words in French. Ambient does not mean "prone to making racist comments," but it does mean "of the surrounding area or environment."

 

[steve_bank]

Roseanne reruns are off all my cable channels. Four networks were carrying them.


FOX, MSNBC, and CNN/HLN are having feeding frenzies. Like starving rats finding a small road kill and battling over who gets to eat. Push mg. shoving, biting, climbing over each other.

So much for cable news credibility, it is all tabloid journalism.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Who is saying you have to raise a fuss? Is it in the libertarian rule book that you have to comment on stuff you don't give a shit about?

I was under the impression that not caring about what doesn't harm you is about as libertarian as you could get. Maybe being libertarian is like buying a Fisher-Price "My first political opinion" and giving it a spin. Whilst they are certainly against a lot of things, they don't really stand for a lot of things either.

Since we stand for individual liberty in domestic matters, individual liberty in economic matters, and peaceful coexistence in foreign policy. Since there are many more ways to deviate from this than to embrace this, there are many more things we are against than in favor of. It is like a cop being in favor of no crimes ... there are so many crimes that one could commit that he winds up being against a lot of things.

Now if you look upthread, you will see the Conservative Republican Underseer is upset about this, and expecting libertarians to join him in being upset about this. The only part that upsets me is that I enjoyed the show. He seems upset for other reasons, perhaps political reasons. Perhaps you can tell me why Conservative Republicans like Underseer seem to think this is more significant than not being able to watch a show I enjoyed, and want libertarians to join in on this more significant issue that I'm not seeing.

 

[Derec]

Roseanne reruns are off all my cable channels. Four networks were carrying them.


FOX, MSNBC, and CNN/HLN are having feeding frenzies. Like starving rats finding a small road kill and battling over who gets to eat. Push mg. shoving, biting, climbing over each other.

So much for cable news credibility, it is all tabloid journalism.

Quite an overreaction, as is typical in today's day and age, sadly.

Also, why is comparing a black person to an ape inherently racist and an unpardonable sin while comparing a white person to an ape is considered completely acceptable?

 

[bilby]

...

Also, why is comparing a black person to an ape inherently racist and an unpardonable sin while comparing a white person to an ape is considered completely acceptable?

Because there is an historical context in which racists have frequently compared ALL black people to apes, but no similar context in which people have compared ALL white people to apes. So one insult refers back to a previous insult now considered unacceptable (and so becomes unacceptable in its own right), while the other does not, and so has not.

As you REALLY should know by now, unless you are a primary school student masquerading as a grown adult.

 

[repoman]

Roseanne reruns are off all my cable channels. Four networks were carrying them.


FOX, MSNBC, and CNN/HLN are having feeding frenzies. Like starving rats finding a small road kill and battling over who gets to eat. Push mg. shoving, biting, climbing over each other.

So much for cable news credibility, it is all tabloid journalism.

Quite an overreaction, as is typical in today's day and age, sadly.

Also, why is comparing a black person to an ape inherently racist and an unpardonable sin while comparing a white person to an ape is considered completely acceptable?

you mean like this?

 

[Derec]

Because there is an historical context in which racists have frequently compared ALL black people to apes, but no similar context in which people have compared ALL white people to apes. So one insult refers back to a previous insult now considered unacceptable (and so becomes unacceptable in its own right), while the other does not, and so has not.

As you REALLY should know by now, unless you are a primary school student masquerading as a grown adult.

I know the historical context. But history is about the past. It should not bind us, or else we will never overcome it.

We did it this way for more than 40 years now. This saying that because of the "historical context" there must be perpetual double standards, perpetual treating black people differently. Has it really worked that well? Should we not try something different? We will not move past our current standing in race relations until we ditch the double standards!

P.S.: Speaking of racists, these days you are much more likely to encounter black racists saying incredibly racist stuff. Instead of getting their shows cancelled, they get shows.

 

[bilby]

Because there is an historical context in which racists have frequently compared ALL black people to apes, but no similar context in which people have compared ALL white people to apes. So one insult refers back to a previous insult now considered unacceptable (and so becomes unacceptable in its own right), while the other does not, and so has not.

As you REALLY should know by now, unless you are a primary school student masquerading as a grown adult.

I know the historical context. But history is about the past. It should not bind us, or else we will never overcome it.

We did it this way for more than 40 years now. This saying that because of the "historical context" there must be perpetual double standards, perpetual treating black people differently. Has it really worked that well? Should we not try something different? We will not move past our current standing in race relations until we ditch the double standards!

Fuck off. History starts now. This is not something from 40 years ago, it is from the much more recent past. And the only way to move on from it - to allow time to make it pass into, if not respectability, then at least rehabilitation - is to NOT DO IT for a long enough time that all those who were subjected to the insult are now dead.

Every time you raise the spectre of this racist insult again, you restart the clock. IF you want to rehabilitate jokes about people being apes, such that they are NOT racist when applied to black people, THEN you need to stop making such jokes. Your grandchildren or great-grandchildren might thank you for it.

Humour is tragedy plus time. If you try for humour without giving it enough time, you just look like a fucking jerk.

When it comes to what is or is not insulting, society binds us, and the root of those bonds is history. Ignore recent history, and you don't come across as a brave warrior for modernity, you come across as a vile and insensitive prick. There is no alternative, no way you can fight that, no option to disregard it - because it binds us whether we like it or not.

 

[Derec]

Fuck off.

I won't.

History starts now.

Wrong.

This is not something from 40 years ago, it is from the much more recent past.

Really? It has been at least 40 years since US has been hypersensitive on the issue of race, but very differently when it comes to blacks and whites. Overreaction to any perceived anti-black racism, but anti-white racists are completely acceptable. That has not been a good development, and I think many of our problems vis-a-vis race stem from that embrace of double standards.

And the only way to move on from it - to allow time to make it pass into, if not respectability, then at least rehabilitation - is to NOT DO IT for a long enough time that all those who were subjected to the insult are now dead.

Slavery has been over for 150 years and still it is used as a justification for special treatment of blacks.

Every time you raise the spectre of this racist insult again, you restart the clock. IF you want to rehabilitate jokes about people being apes, such that they are NOT racist when applied to black people, THEN you need to stop making such jokes. Your grandchildren might thank you for it.

As I said, if you continue to make such jokes about whites acceptable, but treat one with a black subject as an unpardonable sin, you are perpetuating a racist double standard. And your grandchildren will definitely not thank you for it, because we will not have moved from our present state.

Humour is tragedy plus time. If you try for humour without giving it enough time, you just look like a fucking jerk.

And how long should that be in bilby's opinion?