RK ARCHIVE - Oprah's "Some Say" of Elizabeth Edwards

Oprah's at it again. Sanctimonious, stern, and scolding in tone, she went after Elizabeth Edwards on Friday. Before Edwards appeared from a remote location, Oprah asked whether John Edwards should be running, given his wife's significant health problems. Using the same worn "some say" routine pervasive on FOX and CNN, Oprah trotted out four nasty person-on-the-street critics. After the four nasties weighed in, Edwards was pretty much asked to defend herself and her husband. She did so with dignity, good will and good cheer. She noted that those who've experienced cancer in their families have not presumed to judge. It all boils down, she said, to chosing to live your whole life, every day your are given. But she did get in one well-deserved jab at the critics. She said we are a judgmental culture. Amen.
We have no business ruminating, obsessing, second-guessing ANY celebrity or politician with respect to their personal lives. The same goes for ordinary people thrust unfairly into the public domain by the unscrupulous pseudo-moralists of FOX, CNN or MSNBC.

On the other hand, talk show hosts, reporters and pundits NEVER raise an appropriate examination of whether George W. Bush is fit to remain in office. They don't question whether his vulnerability to alcohol has resurfaced, or whether he is currently unstable. He is clearly out of touch, even by many Republicans' estimates. Yet few raise any concern. Nor do they question the "lurker" VP and whether his brain circulation is sufficient to design appropriate government policies in service to voters, not cronies.

Instead of national honesty, we get daily trashing of anyone Democratic (even when they try to solve real problems)and the ongoing vomit of Anna Nichole obsession. Do we really care if teenage mediocrity wins Idol? Every single MSNBC talk show producer seems to think so.

It's all designed so we don't address the disastrous so-called leadership of this country-- pseudo leaders, who don't know the difference between leading and ordering. And these matters do relate to the running of this country.

For media figures to lecture an honorable couple, who set a good example, make a difference, and give of themselves so we can all have health care and general economic fairness, is sickening.

It is not lost on me that Oprah supports Barak Obama and may have had ulterior motives for her meanness. I lean toward Obama myself. But this is NOT the way to garner support for him. Oprah owes the Edwards family -- and all of us--an apology.

Despite my leaning toward Obama, I plan to hear Edwards in Roanoke. And I'll clap for him and his wonderful and courageous wife, who cares more about us than her own personal comfort level. Thank God for Edwards -- whether he is the nominee or not.

Comments

Who is Oprah to Judge (Teddy - 4/8/2007 5:03:18 PM)

Since I have no television set I have not watched Oprah, and can only say I have never understood all this awe in which she is held. So (I have been told) she gives away automobiles to members of her audience? She gains and loses weight like a yoyo? She runs a maudlin and banal book club? This makes her a legend in her own time? Sorry, I do not get it, nor do I understand how or WHY her position as a television "star" gives her the right to make a judgmental call on Mrs. Edwards, even before she talks to the woman on her show.

Why not interview the subject impartially, and let the subject hang themselves or, more likely, convince the audience to honor her on their own? Pre-judging like this is an anathema, and the mark of a vicious, gossipy tabloid mentality. I am disappointed that Oprah would squander all the good will and respect in which she has apparently been held, by indulging in such a questionable "interview." Shame on Oprah.

Well said, Kathy, and thank you. (Dianne - 4/8/2007 7:38:35 PM)

You always write such interesting and thought-provoking diaries. And this one tops it all for me. Why can't Elizabeth Edwards just be left alone to live her life as she wants.

And bravo for your observation that the one who needs to be examined for ousting is Bush. Do you think we're just too ashamed to admit that we elected Bush?

I'm surprised Mrs. Edwards was allowed to talk at all (presidentialman - 4/8/2007 10:43:50 PM)

I didn't see the interview but I've seen a lot of Oprah Show, and her routine is the same, brings out an interesting guest, like Eunice Kennedy Shriver, give them two seconds of talking fore every 15 seconds of talking Oprah does. Its like the Chris Matthews Show for women and gays. I don't care who ya are, when you have the sister of the 35th president of the United States, a former Attorney General,Senator and Presidential candidate and scion to a powerful American political family, on your show, you need to shut up and let the guest talk. Because its not like the guest is John Travolta. And on that note Shriver vs. Travolta, highlights the fact that Travolta is in a profession that plays pretend and dress up.

I don't think she is a fair judge (demo925 - 4/8/2007 11:43:12 PM)

Everyone knows that Oprah is on board with Obama. The rumor I hear around DC is that she will be coming out for Obama very soon. I think it was a good step for CNN to require Carvile to be labeled as a Hillary supporter and I think it would be a great idea for Oprah to do the same.

I like Oprah and Elizabeth Edwards (Susan P. - 4/9/2007 10:21:32 AM)

I saw this interview, and I thought both Oprah and Elizabeth Edwards handled it just right. Elizabeth Edwards is going to get these questions any time she's interviewed, in one form or another. She has a sincere, truthful, uplifting answer that resonates every time she gives it. People are not yet used to individuals with illness or disability, particularly cancer patients, being out in public and living their lives. Society's norms, customs, and expectations are just catching up with the sea change in this area. We're going to have to get used to it, though, because Elizabeth Edwards' generation is not going to hide in their houses when they're ill and won't be confined to a hospital or a sickbed a minute longer than necessary. Elizabeth Edwards became an attorney when few women were members of the Bar and is probably used to this type of scrutiny. Our expectations will change as we are exposed to more trailblazers like Elizabeth Edwards. In that way, I thought the interview was very helpful.

Hi, Susan... (KathyinBlacksburg - 4/9/2007 5:14:05 PM)

I think the interview turned out to be helpful too. But I think that, on balance, it was Edwards herself who saved the interview. The very brief segment was really rigged against Edwards with four persons on the street and Oprah herself fronting for them. There wasn't a single person expressing support for Edwards. And Oprah appeared to condone the critics. She ended a bit more polite. But not enough to make it look fair.

P.S. (Susan P. - 4/9/2007 6:49:18 PM)

My sister has the same condition as Elizabeth Edwards -- stage IV breast cancer metastisizing to the bones, liver, lungs, etc. It is very, very hard to hear about this on t.v., with all the analysts bandying survival statistics and diagrams and the like around. It must be even harder for Elizabeth Edwards. I think the best point she made is that people who have cancer or whose family members have cancer do not question their decision to go on. That's very true; she gives them hope.

Actually - I think this may be the Edwards Strategy (totallynext - 4/9/2007 3:22:49 PM)

Knowing how the interview went with Katie and now OPrah - They may be asking for these tough questions to show the strength they have. I think that it is important for these questions to be asked in public with an on the record response from the Edwards to get rid of the slander and propaganda that happens when right wing people just keep spewing.

This way - it can always be said that the Edwards said this and they said that to support their decision. Of course Oprah likes Obama, he is from Chicago.. But she also supported Arnold.