View Single Post
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 01-15-2018, 09:57 AM
AZRWinger AZRWinger is offline
Conservative Sage
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 17,155
Thanks: 10,328
Thanked 10,856 Times in 6,544 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: Oprah Winfrey... Golden Globes

Originally Posted by mr. wonder View Post
whoah, I that's a pretty dark slant you put on it there.

But AZ, I just don't know how you can be so sure about her dark motives here.
"...was an attempt to marry racial demagoguery with the Spanish Inquisition style Me too movement." "Left wing divisive identity politics"...
But i guess like those that assume the worse possible motives for Trump's every move and somehow assume his evil motives are just "FACTS". I guess you can believe the worse of Oparh here as well.

But for me in this case, I can say that There are plenty of things i disagree with Oprah on, on a lot of levels. But that in this particular speech I can't really find much fault.

Should she come clean about what she knew and why she didn't speak out earlier, on this and other issues, sure. And so should a lot of folks. But IMO If in this speach she was trying to paint herself out o be some kind of longtime leader in this "me too" thing or trying promoted some bogus left wing rules during the speech I'd would have some problems with it. But as it is, it's just comes across to me as:
"RAH!!! RAH!! good for Women for standing up against sexual abuse. RAH!! RAH!! thanks for the award, it's another opportunity to inspire poor young black girls to do better."
So AZ i just don't see it in the sizzling heart of darkness way you've painted it.

You probably know that Oprah was sexually abused as a little girl herself. And that she started a home for girls in Africa were she found out that some of the workers were trying to abuse the children there. She mentioned in the speech of thinking of her mother's hard work during a more racially divided time and what sparked hope in her. So I'm guessing all that did feed into her motives for the speech too
... maybe as even much as any "Left wing divisive identity politics", "racial demagoguery" or "Spanish Inquisition style Me too" concerns.

I just don't see a need to foster MORE division over what she said here. No need to hear it in the darkest light as part of some kind of larger battle.
IMO, Content wise, there's really nothing wrong with it on the face of it.
Neither you or me or Oprah are for sexual abuse or racism. right? Seems to me we all have some common ground there at least.
nothing in the speech seems controversial at all.

seems to me that folks shouldn't always think that just becasue a topic is brought up that it's part of a war.
Oprah is the wealthiest woman in America. Perhaps the richest self made woman in American history. She might have at least mentioned that in passing. But no, she chose to portray her mother as a victim because she worked as a domestic, so much for the dignity of hard work, and wave the bloody shirt over a 60 year old rape.

Ophra took pains to make sure she cited a crime by white men as if a 60 year old crime indicts contemporary abusers. But there is more, Ophra chose to cite a case where civil rights heroine Rosa Parks was involved in a cynical attempt to conflate the civil rights struggle of 60 years ago where taking a stand came with real risks with the eminently fashionable me too movement where any questioning of accusations is grounds for condemnation.

Oprah couldn't bear to mention Hollywood's indifference to the open secret of the abuse for decades. Instead of confronting her close association with Harvey Weinstein Ophra chose virtue signaling. That is not a dark motive, it's a statement of fact.
What is a 30 something year old single man with a rock in one hand and a Honduran flag in the other?

An asylum seeker.
Reply With Quote