Connect with us

News

Roseanne continues to drive the left crazy

Published

on

Did you catch Roseanne last week? It was a pretty good one and the revival of the show has turned out to be one of the few network offerings that my (Democrat) wife and I both look forward to. Unfortunately for some of the more safe space oriented viewers, the show once again slipped in a joke that sent them diving for the fainting couches. USA Today reports that liberals are highly put off over a throwaway line having to do with illegal aliens.

Dan Connor learns that he’s lost the bid on a job, which he finds suspicious because his crew “works for union minimum.” When he inquires as to who wound up with the bid, he asks, “You’re not hiring illegals, are you?” Honestly, I didn’t even notice the line. It wasn’t even close to the being the best among the number of funny zingers peppering the show. But it certainly put Ruben Navarrette Jr. off his feed.

Last week’s episode of Roseanne preached tolerance toward Muslim-Americans. Yet it contained an intolerant slap at “illegals.”

Creator Roseanne Barr has tweeted that, in her sitcom reboot, she wants to “challenge every sacred cow in USA.” But she missed the sacred cow in the immigration debate — the fact that blue-collar workers who feel squeezed out of jobs by illegal immigrants often have only themselves to blame…

Dan blames the immigrants who “are so desperate they’ll work for nothing, and we’re getting screwed in the process.” Meanwhile, Roseanne insists the real villain in this drama is the client, who is “taking advantage” of cheap labor.

Everyone accepts that undocumented immigrants hurt working-class Americans by taking jobs and lowering wages. But Americans need to ask more questions.

This is one of those moments where I almost resent the company policy against using obscenity at Hot Air, because were we having this discussion on Twitter I would have begun this response with #FFS. It’s a TV show. It highlights many facets of normal American life using lovable, funny characters. It prompts discussions to be sure, but must you get so bent out of shape over it?

Also, Navarrette’s kindly characterization of illegal aliens as, “someone who is in the country illegally, who doesn’t speak English and has a sixth-grade education, and who can’t get legal status because both major political parties flunked the immigration issue” may indeed apply to some of the illegals seeking work in this country. But he conveniently ignores the fact that they are still in the country illegally and it’s against the law to hire them. But hey… don’t let pesky details such as those slow your roll.

Still, this episode demonstrates that the show is still hitting its mark and getting people talking at least. Which is why I found this announcement from ABC a bit confusing. Are they really going to extract the politics from Roseanne in the next season? (The Independent)

ABC has revealed that Roseanne will be pivoting from focusing on politics to family in its second season.

On Tuesday, Channing Dungey, president of ABC Entertainment told Variety: “I think that they’re going to stay on the path that they were on towards the end of last season, which is away from politics and towards family.”

The statement shows a change for the show which began its revival with a longstanding family debate between Roseanne (Roseanne Barr) and Jackie Conner (Laurie Metcalf).

Seriously, guys? Moving back to “the path they were on” in the previous season might not be such a hot idea. If you recall, the end of the run for the Conner family wasn’t exactly viewed as going out on a high note. That whole lottery story arc and the case of the mysteriously vanishing Becky made it seem like the writers were really struggling. Also, why do you think there was so much buzz about the return of Roseanne and the actual actress’ activities on social media? It was correctly pitched as entertainment focusing on a different worldview than the generic, social justice warrior storylines being cranked out in every other studio. It made for tension and debate while filling a void created by a plethora of shows which made it look like the entire country was full of families who came straight out of liberal, coastal enclaves.

Not to put too fine of a point on it, but the revival of Roseanne is ringing up serious ratings precisely because of the way it knocks around the ongoing political debates in the country without getting bogged down in them or preaching too much. If you abandon that, I somehow doubt your numbers will be going further up.

Leave a comment

Continue Reading

News

Caravan reaches Mexican border, breaks through fence on Guatemalan side

Published

on

By

The migrant caravan reached the southern border of Mexico Thursday night and NBC News reports some have already crossed the border. Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal described the situation along the Mexican border as tense:

Tension was palpable in Ciudad Hidalgo, a tiny tropical village in Mexico surrounded by rain forest and banana plantations that borders Tecun Uman in Guatemala, with the two towns separated by a muddy river. Late Thursday, some 300 Mexican federal police officers equipped with antiriot gear were deployed to the border crossing ahead of the caravan’s expected arrival…

Many migrants marched along the river banks on Thursday afternoon. “Let them know that we are going to cross to Mexico!” shouted a man clad with a cap in front of the crowd.

The border between Mexico and Guatemala (at this location) is the Suchiate River. Here’s what that looks like from the bridge spanning the river:

There are gates on both sides of the bridge to control traffic. Buzzfeed’s Karla Zabs is there covering developments this morning. A short time ago the caravan began massing at the Guatemalan gate:

And that led to a standoff. The AP reports that “young men” eventually tore open the barricade and swarmed onto the bridge:

Migrants in a caravan traveling through Central America have broken down gates at a border crossing and are streaming toward a bridge to Mexico.

After arriving at the tall, yellow metal fence Friday, some clambered atop it and on U.S.-donated military jeeps.

Young men began violently tugging on the barrier and finally succeeded in tearing it down.

Men, women and children then rushed through toward the bridge, about 150 yards (137 meters) away.

This tweet translates as “Bombshell! Thousands of Hondurans manage to enter Mexican territory!”

The Noticias video below helps explain the sequence of events. This is a live stream but you can scroll back. First people were massed at the yellow gates on the Guatemalan side of the bridge. Then they broke through those gates and streamed onto the bridge as seen in that clip above. The migrants made their way to the Mexican side of the bridge and, at first, it appeared the gates were open, but they were pushed closed by police with riot shields.

A shoving match ensued between the police and the migrants trying to re-open the gates. Some migrants are throwing things at the police and the police appear to be using batons to keep people’s hands off the gates. Finally, when the gate is shut, you see some men jumping off the bridge into the water where they swim to a nearby raft.

Stalemate, at least for the moment:

I’ll update this post when the situation changes.

Leave a comment

Continue Reading

News

BREAKING: Nellie Ohr Invokes Marital Privilege Preventing Her From Answering Questions About Talks With Her Husband Bruce Ohr

Published

on

By

Nellie Ohr, wife of twice-demoted DOJ official Bruce Ohr appeared on Capitol Hill Friday to face lawmakers in a closed-door grilling.

Mrs. Ohr was supposed to appear for a deposition last month but she was refusing to cooperate with lawmakers.

Now this…

Nellie Ohr invoked marital privilege on Friday preventing her from answering questions about her husband Bruce Ohr.

MANU RAJU: Very rare bipartisan agreement: Both sides say Nellie Ohr interview has been led to nothing. She invoked marital privilege preventing her from answering qs about talks with her husband. @MarkMeadows sees no reason to bring her back. @CongressmanRaja calls it a “nothing burger”

Rep. Mark Meadows confirmed Nellie Ohr invoked spousal privilege. 

The House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees sought to question Nellie Ohr after her husband Bruce Ohr gave an explosive testimony to Congress.


The former Associate Deputy Attorney General told Congress the FBI knew his wife, Nellie Ohr worked for oppo research firm Fusion GPS yet failed to disclose that information to the FISC [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court].

Nellie Ohr was paid multiple large payments by Fusion GPS, the oppo research firm that commissioned dossier author Christopher Steele.

Mrs. Ohr also previously worked for the CIA and was a corrupt Communist sympathizer who spoke fluent Russian.

This story is still developing…please check back for updates.

You Might Like

Leave a comment

Continue Reading

News

Disney Princess movies are now problematic

Published

on

By

This week there have been stories about two different Hollywood actresses who both find Disney Princess movies to be problematic in some way. Once celebrities are talking about it, it’s sure to become a trend if it wasn’t one already. First up is actress Keira Knightley who told Ellen Degeneres that she doesn’t allow her daughters to watch Cinderella or the Little Mermaid. From the BBC:

Knightley told Ellen DeGeneres that 1950’s Cinderella “waits around for a rich guy to rescue her. Don’t! Rescue yourself. Obviously!”

She said of Little Mermaid: “I mean, the songs are great, but do not give your voice up for a man. Hello!”

The actress added: “And this is the one that I’m quite annoyed about because I really like the film. I love The Little Mermaid! That one’s a little tricky – but I’m keeping to it.”

I realize there’s probably no upside to arguing about something like this but I guess I expect a bit more from people who actually work in the film industry telling stories for a living. Cinderella is not about a woman waiting around to be rescued by a rich man. That’s missing the real emotional core of the story. Cinderella is about a woman who has been unfairly abused her whole life by her family but whose good qualities are finally recognized and given the respect they are due. The point of the story isn’t that she marries a rich dude, though that does happen. The point is that Cinderella is elevated after years of oppression and her family is punished (violently in some version of the story) for their wicked behavior.

As for the Little Mermaid, I have daughters and I’ve seen this more times than I can count. So I can say with certainty that Knightley gets this one wrong too. In the film, Ariel is obsessed with living life on land and after rescuing a drowning prince she agrees to trade her voice for a chance at happiness (largely because her father refuses to help her pursue her dreams). When Ariel asks how she can win the prince without her voice, the villain suggests she use her looks and pretty face.

But it doesn’t work. Under the villain’s spell, the prince is going to marry the villain until Ariel’s friends intervene and help her get her voice back. It’s only at that moment that the prince realizes Ariel is the one he loves. So, even if you woke-analyze this thing to death, the message isn’t ‘give up your voice for a man and rely on your looks.’ Only the evil villainess recommends that and it doesn’t work. The message here is that a prince will love your voice first and foremost and, in fact, probably won’t love you without it. That seems like a pretty decent message for girls.

Actress Kristen Bell, who starred in Disney’s megahit Frozen, also has problems with at least one of Disney’s princess films. During a recent interview with Parents magazine, she said she talks to her kids about elements of Snow White that bother her, including the kiss:

“Every time we close Snow White I look at my girls and ask, ‘Don’t you think it’s weird that Snow White didn’t ask the old witch why she needed to eat the apple? Or where she got that apple?’ I say, ‘I would never take food from a stranger, would you?’ And my kids are like, ‘No!’ And I’m like, ‘Okay, I’m doing something right.’”

The apple question is not the only one that Bell—a Disney Princess herself as the voice of Anna in Frozen—has after reading the tale. “Don’t you think that it’s weird that the prince kisses Snow White without her permission?” Bell says she has asked her daughters. “Because you can not kiss someone if they’re sleeping!”

I guess her kids won’t be trick or treating this Halloween since that would also be taking food from strangers. The kiss thing is especially silly. Snow White wasn’t taking a nap, she was all but dead. The dwarves were mourning her. Also, the prince isn’t some random guy. He fell in love with her at the beginning of the film and has been searching for her ever since. The whole point of the kiss is that it’s symbolic of his “true love” not some pervert taking advantage of an unconscious woman. And even when he kisses her he clearly believes she’s dead. The prince is surprised when she sits up, alive. Snow White then falls into his arms and rides off into the sunset with him. She loves him too. She’s happy. There is nothing creepy about it.

I wouldn’t expect your average woke-feminist to care about any of these details but, again, these women tell stories for a living. The details and the symbolism ought to matter a bit more than making some political point. Instead of taking a second look, Bell is now claiming to be the victim of misplaced internet outrage:

Here’s Keira Knightley on Ellen:

Leave a comment

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Like us on Facebook

Advertisement

Trending

Close