Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Unorthodox and Sometimes Polarizing, the Incredibly Popular Rosie O'Donnell Will Exit Stage Left

By Jeanine Plant, AlterNet. Posted May 8, 2007.


This fall, viewers will say goodbye to Rosie O'Donnell, a woman who, in spite of her unorthodox voice and often polarizing views, remains overwhelmingly popular. So what is it about this social misfit that so attracts the public?
050807story
050807story

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Why I Want to Turn Religious People Into Atheists
Greta Christina

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Don't Fear the Deficit Bogeyman
John Miller

DrugReporter:
The War on Weed: Marijuana Is Basically Harmless -- The Monumentally Stupid Drug War Is Not
Jim Hightower

Environment:
White House Garden Won't Make Up for Obama's Nomination of Pesticide Lobbyist for US Chief Agriculture Negotiator
Jill Richardson

Food:
Don't Be Scared of Food: Are We Being Needlessly Hysterical About Food Safety?
David E. Gumpert

Health and Wellness:
47,000 Women Could Die As a Result of the New Mammogram Guidelines
George Lakoff

Immigration:
Hate Group, FAIR, Is Looking for "Ethnically Ambiguous" Actors to Amplify Its Racism
Adam Luna

Media and Technology:
The Memory Scrub About Why Ft. Hood Happened Is Almost Complete ... If It Weren't for Archives
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
White House's Ties to Health Care Industry Deeper Than Visitor Records Show
Daniela Perdomo

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Why Can't We Look Away From Sarah Palin?
Vanessa Richmond

Rights and Liberties:
Citing "National Defense Needs," Obama Administration Says it Won't Sign Ban on Land Mines
Amy Goodman

Sex and Relationships:
Hot Mormon Muffins and Models for Jesus: What's With All the Sexy Christians?
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Poseidon's Financial Shell Game: Why Is a Private Desalination Plant Asking for Public Money?
Peter Gleick

World:
Is Obama Following in the Footsteps of Bill Clinton?
Jeff Cohen

More stories by Jeanine Plant

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

"I'm fat and I'm gay," Rosie O'Donnell confessed, smiling sardonically at the camera, on a recent broadcast of ABC Daytime's gabfest, "The View." Deliberately thumbing her nose at the manners and morals of mainstream television is workaday for O'Donnell, so presumably her unabashed honesty didn't ruffle any viewer's sense of decorum. Rather, O'Donnell's voice -- unorthodox and uncouth -- has resuscitated the flagging program in its 10th year on the air. Her remarkably blunt disclosures and infamous feuds helped increase the show's viewership by over a half-million a day, according to the Associated Press.

But just last week, she announced that she will be exiting the show in June. Having initially only signed for a year, she didn't agree to the terms of a new contract. According to the New York Times, ABC had wanted her to commit to three more years with the show, but O'Donnell wanted more money than they were willing to pay.

Come September, when the new season starts, viewers will lose one of the most beloved and most progressive television personalities in mainstream media. Now that she will be leaving, it's instructive to take stock: How do we square her intransigent views -- which can be offensive and polarizing to many, and seem out of step with the larger culture -- with her overwhelming popularity?

Certainly O'Donnell's popularity can't be reduced to her politics. Her unapologetic lesbianism probably offends (while also educating) whole swaths of more traditionally-minded viewers, just as her dietary habits, which consist of eating Oreo cookies in bed, Ring Dings, and Dunkin Donuts, are probably frowned upon by upper-middle-class audience members, who pride themselves on their sense of healthful propriety.

Even those who don't find her coarse and agree with many of her political views sometimes recoil at her misinformation and divisiveness. When she trumpeted 9/11 conspiracy theories recently, suggesting it was an inside job, critics, including AlterNet's Joshua Holland, suggested she helped fuel embarrassing right-wing stereotypes about liberals: "that they're extremists, that they're defined by their fringe and led by out-of-touch Hollywood elites."

So what is it about this social misfit that so attracts the public? For starters, she seems to forge genuine connections with her guests -- unlike the more aloof Barbara Walters -- in part because of her discernible imperfections. At the height of the cell-phone tabloid scandal incriminating Alec Baldwin as a bad father, for instance, he requested to speak on "The View" because he had a history with O'Donnell and knew her to be sympathetic to public embarrassment. When Courtney Love, who has been called a negligent mother in the past, was touting her new book last fall, she bypassed the other panelists to give O'Donnell a hug, as if to gird herself against a potentially chilly reception from the other judgmental hosts.

She's also funny, of course, which is an indisputably likeable quality. But sometimes Joy Behar, her fellow comic panelist, is funnier, always quick with a one-liner; and sometimes O'Donnell can, in fact, be a downer. During the Anna Nicole Smith media frenzy, for example, O'Donnell self-righteously brought up the disparity in media coverage between the B-list starlet's death and the deaths of soldiers in Iraq. And she raised the forbidden topic again during the whole Imus debacle, because -- to the dismay of some feminists -- she didn't quite get what all of the commotion was about. It's precisely because of these impieties, which challenge the niceties of vacuous conversation, I'd argue, that she has so many fans.

That O'Donnell consistently raises uncomfortable truths to an ever-growing audience shows just how hungry the public is for a woman willing to tell them. Bill Maher, for instance, is a somewhat similar public figure in that he's equally funny and politically incorrect, but many of his jokes smack of misogyny. Which gets to the heart of O'Donnell's polarizing nature -- that she is a woman who dares to have an opinion.

Jennifer Pozner, executive director of Women in Media and News, made a similar point in a recent article for The American Prospect Online about why right-wing pundits hate O'Donnell so much. "Certain media men" may not understand O'Donnell's popularity and even resent it because of their belief "that women who watch daytime television are mostly stupid, concerned only with the latest fashions, celebrity gossip, and sex tips, while men are interested in the 'hard news' of politics, economics, labor, science, and world events."

O'Donnell indeed raises the level of daytime discourse not simply by discussing the news of the day, but by bringing a passionate, serious and progressive perspective to the issues and by addressing subjects that don't usually get the airtime they deserve. She has been the driving force behind shows devoted to autism and depression. On the same day that she announced her departure, she vowed to help get 9/11-first-responders, many of whom have intractable respiratory illnesses, the care they need from the government next year.

Throughout the Alberto Gonzales scandal, she has repeatedly called for his resignation and the impeachment of George W. Bush, going so far as to cite Elizabeth Holtzman's The Impeachment of George W. Bush: A Practical Guide for Concerned Citizens. She's identified herself as a feminist on different occasions, and is a formidable adversary to Elisabeth Hasselbeck, the fake-blond, fake-tanned, conservative young mother on the show. She even recently called Hasselbeck out on her advocating Bush's use of torture in the war on terror.

And O'Donnell's staunchly liberal stances can occasionally border on radicalism. When O'Donnell and her other panelists were discussing the British sailors being held by Iran, she echoed Noam Chomsky in Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media by saying: "In America we are fed propaganda, and if you want to know what's happening in the world, go outside the U.S. media, because it's owned by four corporations. One of them is this one (ABC)." In the wake of the Virginia Tech tragedy, she in effect threw up her hands, saying she was not surprised it happened because the National Rifle Association is "the most powerful lobby in Washington." Whether or not that's true is beside the point; what's important is that she got behind defeating the NRA after Columbine.

Sometimes her passion comes off as shrill, such as when she accused Kelly Ripa of homophobia. And sometimes her desire for a quick laugh leads her astray, such as when she offended Chinese Americans with her mockery of their language.

Yet in the eyes of some progressives, surely, she manages to redeem such blunders with the rest of her do-gooding. In the eyes of the Disney Corporation, which owns ABC, she gets away with her leftist dissent by being such a hot commodity. Either way, O'Donnell's whirlwind of a year sends a strong message. That she attracted the ire of Tom Delay, managed to stir up controversy with the Donald Trumps of the world, and often gets the conservative media machine in a tizzy bespeaks her power. That such a progressive force is in such high demand and so threatening to conservative men is a happy reminder that the sea change we saw last November is real and not going away, even though she is.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: the view, progressives, television

Jeanine Plant is a New York-based freelance writer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Hot Commodity
Posted by: edith on May 8, 2007 12:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If she were such a "hot commodity", she would be going nowhere. What are the data as to her popularity? The author repeatedly claim O'Donnell's popularity, yet he comes up with no numbers.

O'Donnell's indiscriminate embrace of every wacko cause, regardless of objective evidence (pro or con), has made her presence a heavy burden on the audience indeed. Moreover, he main talent, i.e.,, a voice that can outshout the other gabsters on The View, is simply unpleasant, regardless of the content of her diatrabes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hot Commodity Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: Hot Commodity Posted by: picket
» RE: Hot Commodity Posted by: fedupw/bush
» RE: Hot Commodity Posted by: babs
» RE: Hot Commodity Posted by: Redhead5050
» Rosie Borealis Posted by: edith
» Sniff, sniff Redux Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» Sniff, sniff! Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: Sniff, sniff! Posted by: edith
» RE: Sniff, sniff! Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: Hot Commodity Posted by: bannelee
Rosie O'Donnell
Posted by: Tom Degan on May 8, 2007 12:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that Rosie O'Donnell is right on the mark with regard to many of the issues she decides to take on. The problem is this (and it doesn't give me any pleasure to say this): that she is a very troubled woman is obvious. When she tries to come off as a physics expert and says that it is impossible for the fuel of a jet plane to melt the steel foundation of a building - even one as large as the world trade center - she just fuels the right wing's pre-concieved notions about progressives. She has implied that 9/11 was an inside job. Really? I need more proof than someone's guess. My guess is that some of the people within the neo-con junta knew it was going to happen and didn't do anything to stop it - that is probably why the Bush Mob was so dead set against the formation of the 9/11 Commission. The problem is Rosie's bloviating (like Al Shapton's) tends to, at times, destract us from disscussing the issues that are screaming to be discussed.

No doubt about it, her heart is in the right place, but at the end of the day, it is not the substance of her argument that the country is talking about - but her presentation - and that's a shame.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
"The Rant" by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Tom Degan
» a crying, dying shame Posted by: orwellwasn'tdreaming
» RE: a crying, dying shame Posted by: Rolomax
» Third-rate psychobabble Posted by: brunowe
» hardly sir Posted by: gretavo
» VERY well written. Posted by: hoogenboom
» Almost... fiction-like... Posted by: eddie torres
» Too easy Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
» Who told? Posted by: eddie torres
» Short cut Posted by: eddie torres
» Why must you deny 4/29 Truth? Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Almost... fiction-like... Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: hardly sir Posted by: brunowe
» RE: hardly sir Posted by: gretavo
» RE: hardly sir Posted by: brunowe
» at least you try... Posted by: gretavo
» RE: hardly sir Posted by: MrAllen
» brunowe - Posted by: LeftWright
» RE: brunowe - Posted by: brunowe
» The (n/t) was a mistake Posted by: LeftWright
» Brunowe? Building 7... Posted by: raffers
» RE: Third-rate psychobabble Posted by: whiteaglesoaring
» It wasn't quite conventional Posted by: brunowe
» Correction Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Correction Posted by: gretavo
» That's right. Posted by: raffers
» any evidence for that? Posted by: gretavo
» the problem here is... Posted by: gretavo
» RE: the problem here is... Posted by: Rolomax
» Tom,,,Please explain.... Posted by: John Rice
» not the Bush Mob Posted by: gretavo
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Krain61
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» PatriotsQuestion911.com Posted by: greenback
» RE: PatriotsQuestion911.com Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: PatriotsQuestion911.com Posted by: greenback
» RE: PatriotsQuestion911.com Posted by: Conservasaurus
» BOY! Posted by: Tom Degan
» #7 is the key Posted by: vangogh69
» RE: BOY! Posted by: whiteaglesoaring
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: Redhead5050
» RE: osie O'Donnell Posted by: glorybe
double standard
Posted by: Alec Freeman on May 8, 2007 1:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"And sometimes her desire for a quick laugh leads her astray, such as when she offended Chinese Americans with her mockery of their language."

Oh, I see. When you insult Chinese people, it's going "astray" (rather than acting like a nine-year-old schoolyard bully, or the neighborhood racist, or...Don Imus). By the way, I'm not Chinese and I was offended by her mockery. There is absolutely no difference between O'Donnell and, for instance, Rush Limbaugh or Michael Savage -- bellicose foghorns with no conceivable intelligence. But that's all you need in America today, bluster without facts or reason.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: double standard Posted by: H_H
» RE: double standard Posted by: hilaryuk
» RE: double standard Posted by: icj
» RE: double standard Posted by: carcinoid112
Recommended Viewing: 70s movie "NETWORK"
Posted by: ZPaul on May 8, 2007 2:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I´d like to suggest, as something that was brought to mind when it became clear Rosie O´Donnell was on her way out, viewing the old, pre-PC, pre-Internet movie "Network". Although there are considerable differences, of course, you just may see some aspects in the film that parallel Rosie´s demise as a TV host.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good commentary
Posted by: kepstein7777 on May 8, 2007 2:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If she's pissing off a lot of people, she must be doing something right.

I hope she gives Elizabeth a good pounding before she leaves. I would take off from work just to watch that.

Either way, Joy is still the coolest out of all of them. If she ever leaves, I hope she goes on to do something even better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Good commentary Posted by: xbj
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: Roverton
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: xbj
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: xbj
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: raffers
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: xbj
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: Truelass
» RE: Good commentary Posted by: xbj
Adios, Rosie -- and good riddance!
Posted by: HughScott on May 8, 2007 3:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Enough said.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Adios, Rosie -- and good riddance! Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
Rosie rocks and will be making a lot more on her new show
Posted by: xbj on May 8, 2007 3:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hopefully she'll stick with politics and real matters, or else she'll lose the new audience she's gained.

Daytime TV needs an Olbermann... or nightime TV, although it's a lot trickier to deal honestly with politics with what has traditionally been a tired or dead drunk audience. Although David Letterman has certainly come around admirably in that regard.

Time will tell.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Around since MTV-Too eary for some
Posted by: placid on May 8, 2007 4:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Back in the early years Rosie was a part the new wave of experiencing music. Pioneering on T.V.'s new video station MTV.(Where are her MTV peers? No bash, she is the only one I recall..Oh,Downtown Julie Brown?) I enjoyed her but I had NO idea "where to from here." That was in the early '80s. .Movies,shows, t.v. radio and most definitely unique.Katrina?!She spoke out and helped out personally, entertainers helped yet Rosie was there and made no bones about"W"doing NOTHING. I love people with passion for others. Rosie got it Love her or not, she has made her mark much more than many of us have or will. Polarizing people intrique us,face it! Mary Basombrio

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Rosie was on VH1, not MTV Posted by: realmuzik
People are also attracted to train wrecks
Posted by: ISlamIslam on May 8, 2007 4:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's one explanation for people's apparent attraction to her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rosie is simply enjoyable
Posted by: nyscof on May 8, 2007 4:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
She's an entertainer and she's good at it. Don't understand what all the fuss is except that her popularity gets ratings for anyone who writes or broadcasts about her.

Not only is Joy Behar funny; but she's said similar things that Rosie has said over the years. But she isn't as popular as Rosie. So criticizing her won't draw more readers or viewers. Too bad. She's really good and equally as intelligent as Rosie.

The View will do very well next year; but we'll miss Rosie.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Sinks to a New Low of DIS-INFORMATION REGARDING ROSIE AND 9/11
Posted by: BillDouglas on May 8, 2007 5:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What Rosie O'Donnell said was, "WTC 7. Look at the collapse. Steel reinforced buildings do not collapse like that from isolated fires. World Trade Center 7"

This is a fact of physics !! Not dis-information.

Rosie was absolutely right. Professor Steven Jones, a highly regarded physics professor formerly at Brigham Young University, has found traces of "thermate" in World Trade Center debris. Thermate is a patented "controlled demolition" steel cutting agent. See:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4884818450327382904

Professor Jones' analysis shows that melting steel was pouring from the buildings of WTC 1 and 2 as well. Jet fuel fire does not burn hot enough to melt steel, let alone all the steel in steel reinforced skyscrapers uniformly. Professor Jones first became concerned when he realized that the WTC buildings on 9/11, fell at near free fall speed. The steel beams were conveniently cut at lengths easy to haul away by a company hired by the govt. called "Controlled Demolition."

Guilliani and FEMA quickly destroyed the WTC steel by shipping it to Asia to be recycled, amid protests by the editor of Fire Engineering Magazine, who said "never before in fire forensic history has forensic evidence been destroyed like this before a full investigation.

There are several good documentaries on this that support Rosie's view. One is "9/11 Mysteries," and another is "9/11 Re-visited."

At PatriotsQuestion911.org you'll find over 100 high level military, intelligence, engineering, and physics experts, who agree with Rosie, that we've been lied to about 9/11.

Alternet's patronizing slap of people "re-coiling when Rosie spoke about 9/11" isn't supported by the facts. A ScrippsHoward Poll showed that 1/3 of Americans believe the US Govt. was either complicit in the 9/11 attacks, or knew they were coming and let them happen. As information continues to surface, that number will only grow.

Alternet's writes do a disservice to their readers by choosing to not only hear, see, and speak no evil re: 9/11, but to participate in the corporate media smear of heroes like Ms. O'Donnell who dare to say the king has no clothes regarding the official myth of 9/11.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» brunowe Posted by: Krain61
» Krain Posted by: brunowe
» So what was the MOTIVE for destroying WTC7? Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
» thanks eddie! Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
» But wait, there's more at... Posted by: eddie torres
» many motives added up Posted by: gretavo
» Hey, I just looked those words up Posted by: eddie torres
» Amen Posted by: BillDouglas
» RE: Amen Posted by: redbrownandblueparty
» Freak Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Keep saying it. Posted by: WhatNow?
If Rosie, representative of women, I Hope Not
Posted by: gdonald on May 8, 2007 6:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is Rosie really the best representative of women? I certainly hope not. I know that her foul mouth puts her in the same catagory as many so called movie industry elite's, the gutter. Yes, she is entitled to her opinions but let's face facts. She is not one who I would want as my neighbor, especially around my granddaughters. There are better ways to express your opinions of people to people, especially when you are given a platform to speak it. Her language and her manners tell me she lacks any significant IQ and moral or ethical values. Glad she is gone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» WE NEED HER HONESTY!! Posted by: fluffmuffinmom
» RE: AN EXAMPLE OF COURAGE FOR WOMEN TO FOLLOW Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» feel better now??? Posted by: 50566
Rosie is a great and courageous American
Posted by: dainin on May 8, 2007 6:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And that's a rare thing these days.

This is actually a pretty fair article. How did it slip that by the editors?

911 Research

Scholars for Truth and Justice

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» More great and courageous Americans Posted by: eddie torres
» America's greatest freeway atrocity. yeowsa? Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
Rosie and the homeless
Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma on May 8, 2007 6:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rosie objected to Giuliani's policies re: homelessness in NYC. A Times columnist was inspired to pose as a homeless man & camp out next to Rosie's mansion in Nyack. She & the Nyack cops were not amused.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rosie spoke about 9/11 being an inside job
Posted by: Aimee on May 8, 2007 6:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"When she trumpeted 9/11 conspiracy theories recently, suggesting it was an inside job, " is when she was on her way out. The View will be back to being just another dumb show for ladies ... no politics please. And the 9/11 issue? Gone. No one will even remember the subject of it being an inside job. TV viewers are so forgetful ...

The 9/11 issue will not go away. The "conspiracy theories" are not conspiracies. There are facts to back up the truths on inside job of 9/11.

Aimee
DataOptions.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Really?
Posted by: NoPCZone on May 8, 2007 6:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Bill Maher, for instance, is a somewhat similar public figure in that he's equally funny and politically incorrect, but many of his jokes smack of misogyny... "

Bill Maher is not equally funny- he's really funny and unlike Rosie, actually has something to say. He also not a repulsively overweight, shrill pig.

"Certain media men" may not understand O'Donnell's popularity and even resent it because of their belief "that women who watch daytime television are mostly stupid, concerned only with the latest fashions, celebrity gossip, and sex tips, while men are interested in the 'hard news' of politics, economics, labor, science, and world events."

No
Women who watch daytime television are mostly stupid, concerned only with the latest fashions, celebrity gossip, and sex tips, while men are mostly interested in sports, gossip and sex.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Bill Maher Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
» RE: eally? Posted by: MrAllen
» RE: Really? Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: Really? Posted by: binkey
A Nation of Radicals
Posted by: rwmk12 on May 8, 2007 6:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remeber building 7? Probably not. Google video it.

How to get rid of a T.V. celebrity who has broken the taboo of the great monologue of network television: throw her off the air that day? No, there goes the appearance of "freedom of speech".... Instead, offer her a new three year contract a few weeks later, but at a rate you know she will have to refuse... political radical gone... network tv safe again from "radicals"= thought control in a "democratic" society. (Just a theory)

By the way, to the author of this article, America was founded by "radicals", or so the story goes. The fat white suburbanite who thinks that reality is network sports, work, and shopping is the equivalent of a loyalist to the english crown back in revolution times, only less self-sufficient, and less free. Using loaded language like "radical" is a sneaky rhetorical tactic called "guilt by association", which undermines anything that is not in line with the conformist agenda. "Sit down". "Shut up". "This train is leaving the station and you aren't driving america". Thankyou author, you're a real paytriot.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Joshua Holland still buying the bull?
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on May 8, 2007 6:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is pointless to pander to the right. After attacking Kerry left right up down and sideways in '04 for being a flip-flopper, they will very likely nominate Romney. And if they do, there isn't much of a chance that the left will be able to use the same flip-flop argument effectively, even though it will be 10x more true for Romney than it ever was for Kerry. That's just the way it goes. I don't think Joshua understands that.

I commend Rosie for talking about WTC7 on her show. To this date there still has not been a real investigation. I'd find that amusing if it wasn't so alarming. We're just now finding out that there are thousands, perhaps millions, of tiny 100~1000 micron iron balls scattered throughout all of the WTC dust that coated all of lower manhatten. Didn't anyone think to take a magnet to this dust and see what happens? That I find very alarming as well.

Anyway, what I am saying is there is evidence of molten iron contained within the pyroclastic cloud formed by the building collapses. I have yet to hear anything even close to a debunking of this evidence... it is very difficult to argue against round iron balls because it clearly means that iron was at one point liquid AND was at one point thrown through the air. What could do that? Only one thing. If people like Joshua Holland actually focused on the facts and the science instead of on the name calling and playing silly little right wing games maybe we'd have answers by now. But that's ok. Why not let Rosie fight all our battles for us?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Fight the Power! Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Fight the Power! Posted by: 50566
» RE: a ton of opinions does not equal Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: not really... a fact is a fact Posted by: Joshua Holland
» and yours aren't Posted by: brunowe
» uh, yes they are! Posted by: gretavo
» RE: uh, yes they are! Posted by: Joshua Holland
» It's not a matter of physics Posted by: Joshua Holland
» believe what you want Posted by: gretavo
» RE: believe what you want Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: believe what you want Posted by: gretavo
» RE: believe what you want Posted by: Rolomax
» Still waiting... Posted by: eddie torres
» Mr. Holland, have you read Posted by: LeftWright
» RE: Mr. Holland, have you read Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Mr. Holland Posted by: LeftWright
» rwa - Posted by: LeftWright
» rwa - sadly, I must agree Posted by: LeftWright
» RE: Petro-dollars are over-rated Posted by: LeftWright
Anybody remember poor Linda Ronstadt?
Posted by: rhinojos on May 8, 2007 7:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
She was the one of the first, if not the first, women, to criticize the Bushonian wagon. What happened to her? Nobody is coming out in droves to cheer her on. I winder why?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Red Brown and Blue Party comment
Posted by: redbrownandblueparty on May 8, 2007 7:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Inner-netting the key words of this title decodes Rosie/911 Mysteries: Unorthodox + Rosie = Polarizing + Plant + Alternet. Rosie is an unorthodox woman planted by Alternet to polarize. The key issue is sex which opens windows to the polarization of money and violence, and accounts for the love/hate relationship with Rose the Womam and 911 the Man. Decode that if you can, seldom done by woman and never by a man.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Decoding 4/29 Truth Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Decoding 4/29 Truth Posted by: redbrownandblueparty
» actually Posted by: gretavo
» RE: ed Brown and Blue Party comment Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: ed Brown and Blue Party comment Posted by: redbrownandblueparty
» RE: ed Brown and Blue Party comment Posted by: Joshua Holland
Excellent Post
Posted by: Jim Shaw on May 8, 2007 8:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Excellent post. Right on the mark. The courage to dissent is exceedingly rare in the MSM, at least in a leftward direction.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

She is Genuine
Posted by: Gravitas on May 8, 2007 8:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think people like her because she is genuine in a sea of phonies! It is just out and out right refreshing to hear someone speak their mind, even if we don't agree with them all the time. Hypocracy is so soul deadening!!!!! (Too bad even she won't talk about the one secret that really needs to come out!) I also loved the way the author juxtaposed homophobia and healthism in the same paragraph. There are those of us who are sick to death of holier than thous period! It is refreshing to see a star NOT a moral fanatic about diet and health. If your body is a temple, that means you worship yourself!!!!! Who cares!!!!! Up with Rosie! Down with every sheep afraid to speak their minds!!!!

"Weight obsession is a social disease. If we cared more about CO2 than BMI there would still be time."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If Rosie is Representative of Women today
Posted by: gdonald on May 8, 2007 8:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I need to clarify things. First off Rosie's mention of 9-11-01 was courageous but then if that is all it takes to win the women over, we're a nation in trouble. My wife like myself also believe that 9-11-01 was facilitated by the Bush regime so she along with thousands of others are also courageous. I take exception to Rosie's foul mouth "Eat Me" phrase to Donald Trump. If this is what today's women wants to be admired for, her ability to speak foul like men, and to lower their standards like so many in movies and politics then we have truly crossed a threshold where women can not demand respect.

Second I never stated in my previous post that women should keep silent. This is an emotional issue with women and emotions are definitely clouding the mind in reading what I posted. Rosie's stand on gun control is anti-gun and thus she doesn't speak for my wife or in fact for any women in the pro-gun crowd and believe me, these women are much more courageous than Rosie.

So before you spout off about what you don't know about me just stick to reading the posts as written and respond with intelligence to what was written and abstain from embellishments.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Red Brown and Blue Party comment
Posted by: redbrownandblueparty on May 8, 2007 8:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rosie is a Rose of Sharon, an Ain't Saint, eveything a Quaint Saint Ain't. The Saints be with ye, my wild Irish Rose. You have done your "bit" for the love of your country. You might have your faults, like living in a mansion while advocating for the homeless (if the story of a poster is true) but you've got more balls than all the necktied, heart choked, talking head, pale male, wimpy wasps put together. Rant on, sister of Van M., hit patriarchy where it hurts, that place where the sun never shines and where its balls should be. A real man would never bully, much less kill innocent women and children. This adminstration out Herods Herod, who also, according to the story, killed innocents. Somehow the Xian neo-con fundamentalists miss the point of their mythical Jesus. They stupidly promote policies that their hero, Jesus, condemned, like killing "little ones," which by doing so fulfils his prediction that "it is better a millstone be tied about their necks and they be thrown in the sea than that they should harm one of these little ones," since "what they do to them, they do it me." Amen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Love it! Posted by: DataDoc
Who cares about meat puppets on television?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on May 8, 2007 9:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A lot of people, apparently... it's just talking heads. I'll make a large exception for Comedy Central and Jon Stewart, Colbert and crew - because they are hilarious and incisive - but there's nothing more pitiful than a bad comedian.

As far as the 911 Truth movement, it's a BS public relations operation put together by that same crowd of right-wing conspiracy mongers that claimed that the Clintons had Vince Foster assassinated - the World Government, Black Helicopters, Right-Wing Militia sponsors (until they realized that there really are whackos like McViegh who would take them seriously) - it's a public relations smear campaign, with films like Loose Change, spokespeople, conned celebrities, a whole load of BS designed to draw attention from a few critical facts.

Bush was warned that hijackings were going to take place in the United States and took no steps to prevent it. He was probably desperate for a distraction - Enron was about to go belly up, the 2000 election was about to be confirmed as stolen, and his backers were desperate to invade Iraq and seize the oil, as per the Cheney Energy Task Force.

Then there's the topic that the 911 Truth Movement (and very most other people) won't touch - the fall 2000 ANTHRAX attacks, carried out using the US biowarfare program's Ames strain of anthrax, (a highly weaponized version which is technically very difficult to do) - a domestic terror operation engineered by US pharmaceutical interests? A lone nut who walked out of Battelle Memorial Institute with a little baggie of the hot stuff? A Rumsfeld operation?

See the details - the only reliable report on this was published by Science magazine: Anthrax Powder: State of the Art? GARY MATSUMOTO

There is no debating that the Senate powder was exceptionally pure and highly concentrated. Nor is there any doubt that it contained the Ames strain, one of the most virulent strains discovered. But what made it truly remarkable, according to biodefense specialists, was its conversion into a cutting-edge aerosol...

William C. Patrick III, former chief of Fort Detrick’s Product Development Division, pioneered the use of a dusty silica powder with nanometer-sized particles added to nonlethal incapacitating agents such as Francisella tularensis, the cause of tularemia (but not Bacillus anthracis, the cause of anthrax). “Otherwise,” says Patrick, the powder was “very hard to disseminate.”...

"The Battelle Memorial Institute, a nonprofit organization based in Columbus, Ohio, is possibly the only corporation in the world known to possess both the Ames strain as well as a “national security division” offering the services of a team of “engineers, chemists, microbiologists, and aerosol scientists supported by state-of-theart laboratories to conduct research in the fields of bioaerosol science and technology.” On its Web site, Battelle calls this research group “one-of-a-kind.”...

Two years on from the attacks, public discussion of the silica additive has all but ceased; the discussion about polymerized glass has yet to occur. Instead, the FBI has devoted much of its effort to the idea that a low-budget amateur operation could have produced a “weaponized” form of anthrax powder without a sophisticated additive.

“ARE YOU AFRAID?” asked our unknown assailants 2 years ago. “Yes,” is still the answer, but of whom?


Enter the 911 Truth movement: a government disinformation campaign. Sleep, little children, sleep... but watch out for the monsters under your bed... they're all too real.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The REAL Rosie
Posted by: willymack on May 8, 2007 9:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is truly educated, literate, truthful, intelligent, and FUNNY. Anyone who's trying to unravel the mystery of her enduring popularity need not look beyond these qualities. Contrast her with the cretin in the White House, who is a demented halfwit, incapable of original thought, a twisted, sadistic sociopath who thinks nothing of condeming our sons and daughters to the horrors of his phony and illegal "war" for his own gain and the war profits of his "friends". Who would YOU rather have in the White House?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The REAL Rosie Posted by: realmuzik
9/11, Rosie and Sheen
Posted by: Reader11722 on May 8, 2007 9:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The mainstream media allows misfits like Sheen and Rosie to expose 9/11 because it will turn people away from the truth. Do not fall for that sham, learn about 9/11.

Regarding an 'inside job': There's only one important question concerning the attacks, did the US gov't allow/participate in 9/11?

The answer to that query would explain the illegal wire-taps, suspension of habeas corpus, banning of books like "America Deceived" from Amazon America Deceived (book) , detaining of dissenters in fences miles away from events, and multiple wars based on lies.

How can the gov't be innocent in 9/11 when we have caught it lying so many times (WACO, Ruby Ridge, no WMDs, USS Liberty, Operation Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, Pearl Harbor, ETC.)?

In law, if you determine a person lies ONCE during his testimony, it can be assumed that he lied in the remainder of his testimony. How come we do not hold the gov't to the same standard as it holds us to?

The gov't lied to us about Iraq and more Americans have died there than in 9/11. If the gov't lied about Iraq then why is everyone so reluctant to believe that the gov't lied about 9/11?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 9/11, Rosie and Sheen Posted by: willymack
HOW STUPID WOULD SOMEBODY HAVE TO BE...
Posted by: Roverton on May 8, 2007 10:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... to believe a single word out of this administration ever again?

What's it called when one tries the wrong thing over and over again, expecting a different result?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Gotta love your photo! Posted by: rwa
» RE: Gotta love your photo! Posted by: Joshua Holland
Understanding modern propaganda strategies:
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on May 8, 2007 10:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush and Cheney are the kind of people who would allow terrorists to attack US targets if they thought it would politically benefit them - but that's where the evidence ends.

Compare that to the 911 Truth Movement, run by the same people who were behind the right-wing political conspiracy theories of the 90's - "Vince Foster was murdered by the Clintons! Black helicopter will come from the UN and take away your guns! World government! World government!"

What's really missing from the 911 debate is the discussion of US government propaganda operations that target the US population - from the lies about Saddam's nuclear weapons (carried out with media collaboration) - what's needed is an honest discussion of Bush's propaganda techniques.

The 911 Truth Movement is a propaganda operation, aimed at transferance - they want to switch the audience's attention from the question "how much did Bush and Cheney know about plans for hijackings in the US prior to 911" and "how much did Bush and Cheney know about the anthrax attacks" to idiotic arguments over bombs in the WTC, missles fired at the Pentagon, etc.

This is exactly how PR campaigns work - it's all about controlling the debate. The point is not to 'prove' their 9/11 claims about missles, etc - the point is to make that the subject of discussion. It's a realtively sophisticated PR practice, but that's the essence - if you control what topics people are talking about, than you've already won.

This strategy also allows for the straw man technique to be used against anti-war activists: "These people are nuts who think the CIA planted bombs in the WTC!" Tar and feather - that's why they call Karl Rove "The Turd Blossom" - I hear Sheryl Crow is still trying to wipe off the residue (apparently more than a single sheet of toilet paper is required).

That's exactly what the 911 truth movement, Alex Jones and prisonplanet, whatreallyhappened, 911truth, etc. are all about - a massive PR operation that mimics the ones run by tobbaco science institutes, fossil fuel funded 'climate science institutes', the pharmaceutical marketing sector, etc. There is a word for such artifically constructed 'grassroots movements': astroturf

Wake up and smell the propaganda... it's all around you, trying to be invisible.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Admin Posted by: eddie torres
» Dude, it's a messed up world Posted by: eddie torres
» Damn Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Damn Posted by: rwa
» Full Circle indeed Posted by: eddie torres
The lemming effect
Posted by: rwa on May 8, 2007 11:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are of course those who have fallen under the hypnotic spell of the TV talking-heads and "experts" whom they worship as authority figures. Unaccustomed to thinking for themselves, no amount of truth can sway them from their preconceived prejudices. They will even deny that which they see with their own eyes. They are victims of a psychological affliction known as "the lemming effect". Lemmings are small rodents who have been known to follow each other as they charge to their deaths into raging rivers or off of cliffs. Lemminghood is an innate psychological phenomenon, present in most mammals and observable in common people as well the most sophisticated and educated elites. Lemminghood is not an intellectual phenomenon - it is psychological. As such, no socio-economic class is immune to its strangulating effect. A grant- seeking university scientist can be a lemming just as much as a fashion obsessed teen-age girl. One blindly follows the latest trendy theory while the other blindly follows the latest trendy clothing style. What's the difference? Neither can resist the force of nature.

The power to fit in with one's social peers can be irresistible. To a human lemming, the logic behind an opinion doesn't count as much as the power and popularity behind an opinion. Man, like lemming, behaves collectively. And it could be no other way. Naturally, the individual must be equipped with this trait. Otherwise, the smallest steps toward civilization could never have been made. Lemminghood is a survival trait, an inborn instinct in the majority of people. However, as with all natural phenomena, this tendency can be manipulated and used for harmful purposes.
It is this lemming effect which enables entire segments of a society to lose their sense of judgment all at the same time. This research paper will likely be wasted on many lemmings. For lemmings, denial is a basic psychological defense mechanism used to not only shield themselves from unpleasant realities, but also to reassure themselves that they will still fit within the acceptable range of opinion held by their peer group. Lemmings are absolutely terrified at the thought of being labeled as an "extremist" or a "conspiracy theorist". At all costs, their beliefs must always be on the "right" side of the issue and conform within the boundaries of their lemming peers. Lemmings simply cannot bear the burden of responsibility, or the discomfort, which comes with thinking independently. They'll resist any efforts to change their misguided beliefs with all their mental energy. We can try to open their closed minds and free them from their self-imposed blindness, but it's not easy fighting the force of human nature. The chains of ideological conformity have too strong of a grip, and breaking them is a difficult task.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The lemming effect Posted by: redbrownandblueparty
» Ha! Jolly funny Posted by: doctorsquared
Revealed: The Men With Stolen Identities:
Posted by: rwa on May 8, 2007 11:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Their names were flashed around the world as suicide hijackers who carried out the attacks on America. But yesterday four innocent men told how their identities had been stolen.
The men - all from Saudi Arabia - spoke of their shock at being mistakenly named by the FBI as suicide terrorists. None of the four was in the United States on September 11 and all are alive in their home country.
The Telegraph obtained the first interviews with the men since they learnt that they were on the FBI's list of hijackers who died in the crashes in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.
All four said that they were "outraged" to be identified as terrorists. One has never been to America and another is a Saudi Airlines pilot who was on a training course in Tunisia at the time of the attacks. Saudi Airlines said it was considering legal action against the FBI for seriously damaging its reputation and that of its pilots."


The story of these identity thefts was also briefly reported by ABC 69 and BBC (England). The FBI does not deny this. Nobody denies this fact because it is easily verifiable. Instead, the US media and government just ignore this inconvenient little fact and keep right on repeating the monstrous lie that the hijacker identities are known and that 15 of them were Saudis.

CNN revealed that FBI director Robert Mueller openly admitted that some of the identities of the 9-11 hijackers are in question due to identity theft. Here's what CNN reported on September 21:

FBI Director Robert Mueller has acknowledged that some of those behind last week's terror attacks may have stolen the identification of other people, and, according to at least one security expert, it may have been "relatively easy" based on their level of sophistication.

This opens up a whole Pandora's box of unanswered questions. First and foremost of which is this: why would Osama Bin laden, the Saudi Arabian caveman, steal identities? To cover his tracks you say? Next question: why would a Saudi Arabian, attempting to cover his tracks, steal the identities of....fellow Saudi Arabians??? What would be the point? Why go you through the trouble of stealing identities that would point back to you? Why not steal Greek identities, or Brazilian identities, or Turkish ones? A much more logical conclusion is that non-Arabs stole these identities as part of a "false flag" operation designed to point the blame at Arabs, and Saudi Arabs in particular.

What kind of a corrupt character is FBI boss Mueller? He initially admitted that false identities were involved with 9-11, but then he allows the media to keep naming these innocent, and alive, Arabs as the hijackers? Why doesn't he correct them?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

GoRosie.net
Posted by: AngelsForTruth on May 8, 2007 12:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For quick information on WTC 7... see
http://www.gorosie.net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Please Rosie, support 4/29 Truth
Posted by: eddie torres on May 8, 2007 12:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For quick information on I580/I880, see 4/29 Truth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stop the 4/29 lie
Posted by: rwa on May 8, 2007 12:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can already hear defenders of the official account screaming "See, fire can cause a steel structure to collapse-the bridge collapsed!"

Comparing the circumstances surrounding the fire and subsequent partial collapse of this bridge to the circumstances surrounding the fires and subsequent complete collapse of the towers and WTC 7 is flawed from end to end. This fact should be obvious to most people; but let's point out a few things just in case they weren't already noticed.

1. This was an open air environment where flames were able to reach their absolute maximum temperature; white-hot and shooting upwards of 200 feet in the air.

2. Those 200 foot flames were acting on a single support truss that was fastened to the two columns pictured here. That truss (and the connectors that fastened it to the columns) represents a small fraction of the steel that would have been found on a single floor of the towers or WTC 7. So again, far more heat focused on a single truss and no way to redistribute the load once that truss was weakened.


3. You'll notice that despite the intense fires ability to weaken the truss and connectors that there is NO mention of molten metal in the debris. Also, unlike the debris of the towers and WTC 7, it's not likely we're going to hear anything about thermate (specifically used to destroy steel columns) in the bridge debris.


4. You'll notice that the concrete roadway that "pancaked down" on the roadway below did not cause the lower freeway to collapse. Nor has the concrete disintegrated into a fine powder.

5. You'll notice the columns were not torn down by the collapse, nor did they evaporate into thin air, rather they are still standing (having only lost the the truss and connectors that held the roadway to them.)

So to quickly recap:

White-hot 200 foot flames acting on a single truss (and no ability to redistribute the load once weakened.)

No molten metal and certainly no thermate found
No column failure
No evaporation / pulverization of concrete
No "pancake collapse"


-Ending with a paragraph from The 1-hour Guide to 9/11.

For the record, few in the scientific community doubt that it's theoretically possible for a building to experience failure if it is subjected to devastating heat for a sufficient period of time. And additional factors like no fire-proofing, no sprinkler systems, insufficient steel to "bleed off" heat or inferior construction greatly increase the possibility. However, what is "doubted" (or more accurately; considered downright impossible) is that such a failure would resemble anything like what was witnessed on 9/11. -Gradual, isolated, asymmetrical failures spread out over time; perhaps -simultaneous disintegration of all load bearing columns (leaving a pile of neatly folded rubble a few stories high) -no way.

http://stopthelie.com/freeway_collapse.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Two words: Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Two words: Posted by: EncinoM
» Missing Missile Pods Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Stop the 4/29 lie Posted by: Cathyblj
» RE: Stop the 4/29 lie Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Stop the 4/29 lie Posted by: EncinoM
» Pancaking Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
Rosie tells the truth, what's wrong with that?
Posted by: progressivetype on May 8, 2007 1:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"That O'Donnell consistently raises uncomfortable truths to an ever-growing audience shows just how hungry the public is for a woman willing to tell them" (the author forgot to finish the sentence with).....the TRUTH!

I read this article to my 82 year old mother who loves Rosie for one reason only, Rosie tells the truth and people are hungry to hear it. We think the point of view in this article is confused. Rosie tells the truth but it makes people, esp. middle aged rich white men uncomfortable, what's wrong with that?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rosie is popular...
Posted by: vangogh69 on May 8, 2007 1:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Because she's one of the few on Corporate TV to say: one, the White House is run by criminals; two, is disgusting that more attention is focused on a vacuous celebrity (ANS, whom I found tepidly amusing at best) than an ongoing murderous illegal occupation; three, 9/11 is by large accounts, the least studied episode (with respect to its importance for all that has followed) of criminal negligence OR criminal intent ever committed on US soil; and four, she is a gay person who refuses to accept the aquiescence of marginalization (even if I, a queer man, don't agree with all her politics, I applaud her gumption and bluster). "The View" was lucky to have her, but I'm not surprised...it was bound to be a short wedding.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is so much out there
Posted by: fedupw/bush on May 8, 2007 2:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Many experts have stated that at NO time in HISTORY has a steel building been brought down by a SMOKING fire ! Look at all the pictures of the twin towers--what do you see SMOKE,most people that have ever started a fire in the fireplace,a camp fire or wherever, know, if its smoking , that means it ISN'T burning very good! Besides NO building has ever come down because of fire only ! In S.A. a building burned very hot for 34 hours and NEVER came down ! Besides all that No building with that many floors,built as it was , has ever fallen in less than 10 seconds with out help !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: There is so much out there Posted by: Joshua Holland
» You must be the biggest sucker ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Repetitive post Posted by: rwa
» Evasive reply Posted by: Joshua Holland
Why Call Rosie A Misfit?
Posted by: bcgirl125 on May 8, 2007 2:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
She's fat and believes that the official 9/11 story is a lie. But then, the majority of Americans are overweight, and the majority believe that the government either let 9/11 happen, or made it happen. So why does Alternet smear her as a representative of some wacky fringe? The establishment media is completely out of touch with the views and lifestyles of most members of the public.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why Call Rosie A Misfit? Posted by: Roverton
Staying Close to Home
Posted by: ususesttyrannus on May 8, 2007 3:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The interesting thing about Rosie O'Donnell in particular is that she is how well she has managed to stay connected to her roots and who she is despite the fame, wealth, etc. She is still a Long Island, Irish girl and continues to draw from the experiences of her childhood when forming opinions about different issues. I have only seen the show once [The View] and during that one episode she must have referenced her childhood four times. I find that admirable. Sometimes we grow up and discover new things about life, but we forget who we once were and we are no longer loyal to that person. Norma McCorvey, Roe vs. Wade, is the best example of a person who loss track of her roots later in life. As a young adult she filed suit against the state in hopes of legalizing abortion so that she, who claimed to have been impregnated through rape could have an abortion. However, she eventually became a pro-life activist. She, unlike O'Donnell, forgot to take care of the other young, inexperienced pregnant women who would have benefited from an abortion. O'Donnell understands that she have found success, but that doesn't mean that she must become this success.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

*Rosie* turns the light of truth on corporate media?
Posted by: doctorsquared on May 8, 2007 4:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you want to experience a dissenting voice, read Chomsky or Zinn. Rosie also will reap what she has sown by eating ring-dings and Oreos and thumbing her nose to a healthy weight when she has a heart attack or stroke in a few years. I must admit, though, my perceptions of Rosie have been irrevocably shaped by this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Chomsky???????? Posted by: rwa
Hugh Scott’s swan song: “Adios, AlterNet bloggers.”
Posted by: HughScott on May 8, 2007 10:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
During the past five months of AlterNet commenting by yours truly, the hits on my nonprofit website, King-George.biz, increased more than I could ever have imagined -- as the following numbers show:

DEC 2006 ..... 23,196
JAN 2007 ...... 49,898
FEB 2007 .... 123,543
MAR 2007 .... 463,691
APR 2007 .... 634,595

Rather than AlterNet posting, I have decided to use other methods of publicizing King-George.biz, which features President Bush’s falsified biography, the one I found in 2004 on a U.S. State Department website and reported to the Boston Globe.

For starters, I will write personal letters about the “Bogus Bush Bio Caper” to all Democratic members of Congress.

I also want to finish my second nonfiction book about Shrub titled, “LIAR-in-CHIEF,” and promote the first one, George Dub-ya Bush, THE PHONY FIGHTER PILOT, published in 2004.

Finally, I need more time for other creative endeavors of mine -- such as writing novels, cartooning, painting and sculpting -- plus enjoy the company of my wife of 49 years, Jean, my 13-year-old grandson, Dustin, his mother, Julie, and other Scott family members. And, of course, I will continue my participation in MoveOn.org (I’m a four-year member).

Good luck to all of you. It’s been fun.

One more time --- Hugh E, Scott, the editor of King-George.biz, the ONLY website with hardcopy proof of White House corruption.

PS: If you enjoy reading science fiction novels, visit the website for my 122,000-word thriller,
TheLastUFO, and read the first two chapters. Set in 1996, the story is based on classified CIA photographs of a flying saucer I stumbled across in Washington, D.C, while serving as a young Air Force intelligence officer. Seriously.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Cheers, Mr. Scott - Posted by: LeftWright
Josh Holland, this article and Alternet = Full of Shit.
Posted by: johndoraemi on May 8, 2007 11:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"When she trumpeted 9/11 conspiracy theories recently, suggesting it was an inside job, critics, including AlterNet's Joshua Holland, suggested she helped fuel embarrassing right-wing stereotypes about liberals: "that they're extremists, that they're defined by their fringe and led by out-of-touch Hollywood elites."

Would it not be more embarrassing to the fascists to point the finger at Bush sitting with his Pet Goat book as the towers burned?

Embarassing is the level of journalism on this website.

It's pretty much a "slam dunk" that this entire administration should be removed from power and investigated for high treason.

George Tenet just published a gaffe that he lied to the 9/11 Commission under oath -- a punishable crime. He actually DID go to Crawford and speak with Bush and his advisors about the terrorist plot. His lie(s) to the 9/11 Commission need to be investigated immediately. Could someone find me a Democrat politician who gives a flying fuck about high crimes in this banana republic?

Oh. That's unthinkable. We're not supposed to think that anyone assocated with the white house could ever commit treason.

Why?

I'm not sure. I never got the memo as to why it is inconceivable for known liars and mass murderers to commit crimes against American civilians.

Maybe its a controlled "alternative" press that gets funding from shady CIA connected foundations? Maybe that makes it unthinkable. Those incestuous rags, the Nation, Democracy Now, The Progressive, etc. They share a lot of guests, a lot of tightly controlled worldview, and a lot of behind the scenes funding.

Fucking shills.

THEY KNEW: Tenet's Book Reveals 9-11 Perjury:
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Airtime" for progressive perspective...
Posted by: Blade on May 9, 2007 12:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"O'Donnell indeed raises the level of daytime discourse not simply by discussing the news of the day, but by bringing a passionate, serious and progressive perspective to the issues and by addressing subjects that don't usually get the airtime they deserve."

James Spader did the same tonight.

David Kelley's "Boston Legal" aired some good stuff via the Alan Shore character tonight. Episode called "Gauntanomo on the Bay". I heard stuff from Spader's mouth that you never hear on TV, and with passion. Was a good way to get some info out there.

The Denny Crain character, the Archie Bunker of today's TV, spouted the Neo-Con view, etc., in a appropriate ridiculous way.

There were some really great concepts and truths thrown out there in a creative, dramatic way.

All the while making fun of male misogyny, and female manipulativeness, among other things.

Check it out if you get a chance, was unusual entertainment...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

More Mealy-Mouthed Trash “Journalism” from AlterNot
Posted by: Hal on May 9, 2007 12:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All the buzz about what happened or not over odd failures of 3 WTC towers is still a bit premature (not for long however).

What is not in doubt is a criminal 911 cover-up with more holes in it than Osama Bin Laden’s resume as CIA asset “Tim Osman”.

This is a cover-up and blackout operation enforced across the west and back again for Kool-Aid none but the gullible could swallow. Official 911 Kool-Aid so paranoid it stole what’s left of “democracy” at home and made blood money killing fields of the Mid East and Eurasia.

For make no mistake – 911 is bogus “war on terror” and always has been.

The so-called left had to pump a train wreck of homicidal lies to foist “war on terror” it can no longer sell. And now a grotesque 911 sham is in danger of full exposure. Yes, keeping a lid on the sting has been job one for a de facto Fascist Monopoly State and its Washington MSM circus. But those like Rosie O’donnell speaking truth to Fascism have made the status quo more difficult to maintain.

It’s about to become far more so…

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Yes... Posted by: Hal
Manuel Valenzuela:
Posted by: rwa on May 9, 2007 7:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the years since 9/11 those who have woken from their slumber have realized that there is no major difference between the two political parties in America. This duopoly, or two headed hydra, is but two sides of the same coin, representing the same corporatist interests, the same small elite that is invariably molding America further along the corporatist model.

When one party seeks to start an illegal and immoral war and the other party does nothing to stop it, even though the blatant lies, deceptions and fictions used to sell the war are known and understood for the chicanery they are, it cannot be said that an opposition exists. When said war turns out to be the greatest strategic disaster in the history of the nation and the so-called opposite party remains silent and indifferent, it cannot be said that an opposition exists. When the Bush administration has proceeded to abrogate the Constitution, Bill of Rights, freedoms, liberties and rights of Americans, and the so-called opposition party stands idly by and in many instances votes to destroy those same principles, (think Patriot Act and its progeny, Military Commissions Act, Habeas Corpus, Posse Comitatus Act, martial law, wiretapping) it cannot be said that an opposition exists. When the Geneva Convention is ignored, torture becomes the new normal and gulags roam the planet, without so much as a whisper of dissent from Democrats, it cannot be said that an opposition exists.

When Democrats chose to remain silent when confronted about the truth of 9/11, when they refuse to acknowledge what really happened, when they ignore the voice of millions who want accountability, when they refuse to call for an independent investigation into the worst act of mass murder in American history, it cannot be said that an opposition exists. When the Republican Party has concocted a fictional war on terror, espousing perpetual fear for perpetual profit, exporting terror and insecurity to America, instilling fear into the American psyche, and the Democrats fail to speak out, act out, and try to stop the madness, it cannot be said that an opposition exists. When the Democratic Party chooses to play politics with the Iraq war, putting the expected attainment of presidential power in 2008 ahead of the lives of thousands of Iraqis and American soldiers, allowing Iraq to disintegrate further into hell in order to secure the presidency and the Congress, creating the illusion that it wants to end the war, yet knowing full well that it will continue well into the future, it cannot be said that an opposition exists.

With both parties beholden to the corporate world, to the Israel Lobby, to the same vices and corruptions, both eager to please their masters and the elite that support them, it cannot be said that true democracy still exists in America. When America’s foreign policy in the Middle East is decided and controlled by the state of Israel because AIPAC, JINSA, the American Enterprise Institute and New York moneyed elite are masters to those in Congress, democracy does not exist. When the military-industrial complex can dictate war, when it can pillage our treasury, aided and abetted by our so-called representatives, democracy does not exist.

full article:
http://www.iraq-war.ru/article/127394

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

9/11
Posted by: kevin1234 on May 9, 2007 10:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I do no think claims of government involvement in 9/11 are so far fetched. The likely government involvement in the event of 9/11 is in the following areas: (1) It is argued that the government was well aware of the plans to hijack plans and fly them into targets and knew within minutes that the planes had been hijacked. I find this to be credible.

(2) The collapse of the bulidings in NY were probably the result of controlled explosions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Credibility is everything Posted by: elisabeth
» Gatekeeper described Posted by: rwa
» RE: Gatekeeper described Posted by: elisabeth
Rosie Colored Glasses
Posted by: elisabeth on May 9, 2007 11:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://salon.com/opinion/paglia/2007/05/09/scarborough/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

good work
Posted by: primus on May 10, 2007 3:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Goolge are best from the best
GOOLGE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

stormy7
Posted by: STORMY78 on May 10, 2007 3:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
ROSIE O MADE THE VIEW THE MOST INTERESTING PROVOCATIVE MORNING PROGRAM.

AS FOR THE THEORIES ON WHAT REALLY HAPPENED ON 911, I AND MILLIONS OF OTHERS WHO HAVE RESEARCHED IT AND DONE THE JOB, ASKED THE QUESTIONS THE PRESS SHOULD HAVE BEEN ASKING, ARE MORE THAN CONVINCED THIS CORRUPT BUSH/CHENEY GOVERNMENT WAS BEHIND THE ATTACKS.

JUST GOOGLE...PROJECT FOR A NEW AMERICAN CENTURY AT THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION AND START THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE PLAN FOR WORLD DOMINATION. YOU WILL BE SURPRISED WHO SOME OF THE AUTHORS OF THIS PLAN ARE. CHENEY, WOLFOWITZ AND A FEW OTHERS INVOLVED WITH THIS GOVERNMENT.

WAKE UP AMERICANS!!!!

ORWELL WAS RIGHT!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Fails Due Diligence Test
Posted by: sagesnow on May 12, 2007 2:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
t is disappointing that Alternet, a blog that is usually provides very edgy and Alternative stories,
has not done reasonable diligence in researching the events of 9/11. In her article "
"Unorthodox and Sometimes Polarizing, the Incredibly Popular Rosie O'Donnell Will Exit Stage Left"
Jeanine Plant dismisses Rosie O'Donnell as a leftie misfit because she (along with many other Americans)
does not believe the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) concerning the attacks on the World Trade Center on 9/11 . Apparently Plant has totally accepted, and assumes that all other people do believe, the OCT.

To Plant it does not seem incredible that 19 arab hijackers armed with boxcutters were able to commandeer 4 airplanes and outwit US air defense on September 11. It does not seem unusual that many US Air Defense pilots normally assigned to intercept hijacked planes, were coincidentally ordered to participate in 14 separate Air Defense drills on that day. Again, coincidentally, several of the aforementioned air defense drills involved intercepting airplanes hijacked by terrorists. The simultaneous drills left participants confused as to whether the WTC attacks were real or drill. (Google: Operation Able Danger)

Plant must not have read accounts that in spite of poor grades at flight school, the Arabs were able to perform complex aerial maneuvers at a very high rates of speed and hit the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. The extremely restricted Airspace over the Pentagon was curiously unguarded. On 9/11/07, the Pentagon was unable to intercept an off coarse plane that had been in the air over an hour, even after two hijacked planes had already hit the Towers.

According to the Chief Engineer at the WTC, who died in the attacks, the World Trade Center was designed to take multple hits by wayward airplanes. No other steel skyscraper has ever fallen before or since 9/11 of fire. Furthermore, no steel skyscraper has ever fallen into nearly it's own footprint at free fall speed.

Luckily, the Barrier Walls that contain the Hudson River under the Twin Towers, were unscathed by fires and tons of rapidly falling debris. Fortunately, only buildings leased by Mr Silverstein sustained severe damage.


The NIST report and Popular Mechanics tell us that the fire from the jet fuel caused the steel beams to weaken and sag and eventually give way. Although the NIST report tells us the floors pancaked, no evidence of pancaked floors remained in the aftermath. All the cement slab floors appear to have turned to ultra fine powder and spread out over Manhatten. What could have disintegrated the Center Core columns containg the elevator shafts is completely unaddressed the 9/11 Commission. A firefighter at the scene reports something to the effect that not a desk not a chair....nothing remained of the office furnishings that was larger that a telephone keypad. Plant apparently, is not annoyed that the steel beams from the WTC crime scene were reportedly quickly loaded on trucks and shipped to China before forensic tests could be ran on them.

We were told that the black boxes were completely destroyed in the inferno of collapsed buildings, yet one of the hijackers billfolds containing his passport flew out of the crashed plane, survived the jet fuel explosion and tower collapse and was found the same day by an unnamed official.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

drones
Posted by: paschn on May 13, 2007 7:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hi Drones,

Wanna know why she remains popular? Cuz the gal has more balls and brains than all "our boys" who would rather risk DEATH than OSTRACISM for standing up for the truth and refusing to GO MURDER the people of tiny nations who refuse to kiss U.S. "christian" ass.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement