Mr. Wow Blog
Mr. wOw’s Au Revoir to Oprah
5:04 pm | May 27, 2011

Author: Mr. Wow | Category: Culture Point of View | Comments: 109

Our beloved columnist may not fully “get” the talk show queen. But he’ll miss her…

Many years ago, a friend of mine sat me down and delivered a long, serious dissertation on the talent (or lack thereof, to be correct) of Mr. wOw’s sentimental favorite iconic movie star, Marilyn Monroe. After pulling Miss M. apart in the most astute manner, my friend put his hand on my shoulder and said, “You are so smart. I just don’t get it. What do you see in her?!”

My reply? ”All your points are valid, but she moved me.” My friend pushed me away, threw up his hands and said: ”Well, you are just hopeless.”

I was reminded of that conversation as I watched Oprah Winfrey’s final show this week. One hour of the Big O testifying. I thought I was going insane! Blah, blah, blah. (And but of course her final “guest” would be herself. It makes perfect sense no matter how you feel about her.)

I have never indulged in the Oprah Kool Aid. I absolutely do not “get it” when people talk about her amazing powers of sincerity and connection. She has never seemed like a “best friend” to me. Her grandiose sense of entitlement has always amused me, however.

That said, I can’t deny what this woman has accomplished and what she does mean to millions of people. Whether she thinks of herself as God or not (I suspect she does,) she has done good deeds, inspired people to better themselves and forged an unbreakable bond with those who literally worship her. If I live to be 100 I will never be as certain of myself, or as inspiring to others, as Miss Winfrey has been.

I complain a great deal (mostly to myself or to poor B.) about my lot in life. But even I know I bought and paid for that lot, and if I wanted to, I could sell it for a better property. I’m afraid to now, but fear has always ruled my life. Oprah was fearless. Or she appeared that way. Or she used her fear wisely. Oprah moved people; you cannot explain that kind of power and attraction.

And so she is gone. Kind of. We will never (perhaps) hear those fabled five words again: ”Did you see Oprah today?”

I’ll never “get” her. I won’t. But I don’t disparage those who do.

After all, I have Marilyn in “The River of No Return” to make me blush, and force me to explain that she got much better later on.

  • lsmyers

    So long, farewell Oprah.. May the OWN network become all you have visioned it to be.

    1:39 am | May 27, 2011
    • Mr. Wow

      Well, I think it will improve, now that she can give it her full attention.

      6:01 am | May 27, 2011
      • lsmyers

        Filling 24 hours of diversified programming opposed to 1 hour of me programming, should be a new awakening to her. Hopefully it will not just become a continuous lineup of her friends having new shows. Her show did contain many moments where the guests touched a cord in others or herself, though her touching a cord in me – did not happen. I could not feel that genuine energy coming through unscripted. I will observe the stages of OWN in the future to see if this changes. Oprah, you now call yourself a master – though to this point I only see a master of other peoples information. When the knowledge shines through the experience the title could be warranted.

        10:31 am | May 27, 2011
  • Maizie James

    Of Oprah’s exit you said, “I’ll never “get” her. I won’t. But I don’t disparage those who do.”

    My, my! Mr. wOw you always amaze me. In this instance, you’ve displayed a gallant side of your personality, which is adorable. In fact, you sound rather noble. Because your farewell to Oprah was touching, thoughtful, and … rather generous. I admire your style, wit, and candor.

    BTW: I can relate to your giddy admiration for MM, because I’ve had similar confounding feelings for Tommy Lee Jones, for reasons which eludes me. TLJ arouses passionate longing in me that continues to leave me dumbfounded.

    Loved your article. Love you!

    1:56 am | May 27, 2011
    • Mr. Wow

      Dear Maizie…

      I am old enough to recall Tommy Lee’s beginnings on my favorite (now doomed) soap, “One Life to Live.”    He was hot.  My feelings for him never confounded me. He was hot!  (Remember “The Eyes of Laura Mars”?)

      6:26 am | May 27, 2011
      • Richard Bassett

        Yes, around 1970…Tommy was on “One Life to Live”, playing a doctor (Mark) who was married to a frigid sexually young girl (Julie). In his frustration, he turned to another doctor, Dorian (who was a cougar then, but…as in all soaps…stayed the same age for thirty years) There was also a storyline between them that turned into the malpractice suits to end all malpractice suits and both lost their medical licenses. No doubt, Tommy was as handsome as could be (who could ever be frigid with him) but by 1972…he was on his way to Hollywood.

        5:26 pm | May 27, 2011
      • Baby Snooks

        He’s still hot. At least the Texas Democratic Party thinks so. They hope his next starring role is as the governor of Texas in 2014. And he’s considering it. Of course after his first legislative session with the Democrats he will probably become a Republican. But let’s not tell them that because I think he probably would make a good governor if we need another one and it looks like we might. Rick Perry is considering running for president. And probably will. And probably will win if Barack Obama doesn’t start paying attention to Main Street instead of Wall Street.

        4:29 pm | May 28, 2011
    • Lourdes

      I wouldn’t say that Tommy Lee Jones is “handsome”, but he has something of a ‘quality’ that I just love! I enjoy each and everyone of his movies, because he’s such a good actor, and so charming, some times even sexy…

      Mr. Wow, I don’t know if “Coal Miner’s Daughter” can be classified as one of his first movies, but it’s my favorite. Superb movie, superb performances!

      4:28 pm | May 27, 2011
      • Maizie James


        I agree. I also saw Tommy Lee Jones in, A COAL MINERS DAUGHTER. In Mr. wOw’s words, “He was hot! ” And in recent movies [No Country For Old Men], he continues to exude a roughed sexiness that’s arousing.

        6:15 pm | May 27, 2011
        • Maizie James

          Opps. I can’t spell!

          Instead of ‘roughed’, I meant to write, rugged.

          11:28 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Jessica Burnette

    I agree, Mr. WOW.  I don’t get her, but I admire her for the role model she has set for young women, black or white.  She really showed the world and everyone who didn’t take her seriously, grouping her in with such talk shows as Sally Jessie Raphael, Donahue, and Geraldo when she came on the scene.  She is proof to anyone that no matter your circumstances or the hand you’ve been dealt, challenges can be overcome and success and strength can rise from the ashes of the past.  My last Facebook post asked if there will be Oprah Rehab for all those bawling their eyes out over “the end.”  I certainly won’t be there, but it will be strange to not see the previews for her shows during the morning news.

    3:04 am | May 27, 2011
  • Jessica Burnette

    By the way, Mr. WOW, my movie crush was Devon Sawa (from the Final Destination Movies).  At least you picked one with more talent :O)

    3:07 am | May 27, 2011
    • Mr. Wow

      Dear Jessica…speaking of blushing over one’s idol.  Here I am channel-surfing  this a.m.—MSNBC, CNN, FOX and the various movie channels–and what’s on?  “There’s No Business Like Show Business.”  Soon, I’ll be watching my beloved MM over-enunciate her d’s and T’s and bump and grind shockingly through her “Heat Wave” number.

      She really did  get much better later on.

      6:13 am | May 27, 2011
      • Maizie James

        After I saw MM debut? in the Bette Davis classic, ALL ABOUT EVE it was difficult for me to take her seriously as an actress. Although, she managed a fair performance in BUS STOP.

        6:20 pm | May 27, 2011
        • Mr. Wow

          Dear Maizie….

          Not quite her debut.  But she was already playing a parody of what Hollywood already thought of her. 

          “Bus Stop” though it has not aged well, shows the pathos beneath the parody. 

          Try “The Prince and the Showgirl.” 

          Or–her greatest film, “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes.”  Just remember–these are the characters she was given to play.  They are not her.  (MM didn’t own any real jewelry!)

          6:47 pm | May 27, 2011
          • Paul Smith

            You’ve mentioned “P&SG” twice lately. Why is this one of your favorites? I myself like the kept woman role in Asphalt.

            10:32 pm | May 27, 2011
          • Mr. Wow

            Dear Paul…

            “Prince…” is a remarkable comic performance.  Not a great film, but she is wonderful.

            I like her small bit in “AJ” as well.  Houston gets a relaxed performance out of her.   And…so slim!  Her calendar girl figure.

            But like I say…I get it when people don’t get her at all. 

            11:40 am | May 30, 2011
          • Maizie James

            I’ve not seen it in years! I’ll add it to my Netflix queue.


            10:35 pm | May 27, 2011
          • rick gould

            Reading all the comments about Marilyn got me to thinking why she and the suits at Fox had such a rancorous relationship…and then it hit me: They tried to treat MM the way they treated Betty Grable. Cast her in the same cartoonish roles, sit back and watch the money roll in. Grable knew her limitations and went with the money. But Marilyn had depth and fought against it. Unfortunately, she didn’t have the tenacity and will of Elizabeth Taylor, who was being cast repeatedly as the girl who had everything over at MGM.

            Marilyn did get better as she went along. I think “Some Like It Hot” was perfection, though the making of the movie was apparently a nightmare.
            And “The Misfits” is touching, but so hard to watch knowing that most of those actors would be dead a few years after its making.

            Oh, and “The Seven Year Itch” is Marilyn at her most charming and a great time capsule of the Big Apple mid-century.

            3:03 am | May 28, 2011
          • Richard Bassett

            Except for 1949’s “A Place in the Sun” (with her performance coming from love and awe of Monty Clift) Elizabeth, in her late teens and early twenties, DID make a series of films where she was used as a ‘clothes hanger’…an ultra-beautiful model who spoke dialog. Those are her words. That was fine with her. She just showed up for work. Even the performances in her period pieces, “Ivanhoe” (1952) and “Beau Brummell” (1954), she still played an MGM walking /talking mannequin…though she always had a glimmer in her eye that would start the camera’s love affair with her. At 22, she made (while pregnant) “The Last Time I Saw Paris” in 1954 and saw herself in meatier roles (so she says) and was sick of being the bread winner of her family. So soon the scripts of the epics and mega- major film roles she played for the next 14 years continued to drop in her lap. With the exception of “National Velvet” (1944), when she was 12…she never demanded or fought for a film role. MGM saw her growing potential, and but she made films for money, Mike Todd or Richard Burton. She always just grazed through her film roles magically and didn’t complain about the film roles she was placed in, or signed to do. Unlike other actresses for the past few decades, she did what she wanted and the camera was now in full swing of her acting technique. After 1954, her love affair with the camera was cemented. She did bark at “Butterfield Eight” (1960) but certainly not for film exposure…she wanted to get the hell out of MGM, so made some demands if she had to make it. Her career ALWAYS came second or third to her personal life…which was usually why she never ‘fought for a role’ (at lease fought enough to make it to the press). Her employers wanted her. Most times she consulted with a husband though the decision was hers. A thorn in her side was that damn MGM contract. She made very little money (for her) at MGM or being loaned out and in the end, the contract finally was fulfilled and always stated that he goal was to be a wife and mother; her acting career behind. That never happened. She HAD to work to live the life of luxury that she did in the 1960’s. My point is 90% of the time; she was in control of her career. THAT was unique; never seen in an actress before her.

            6:56 am | May 28, 2011
          • Mr. Wow

            Dear Rcik and Richard…

            Richard…spot on about ET and her attiude toward her career.   Whatever her artistic aspirations (if indeed she ever had any!) they were extinguished early on by MGM.  She was always professional and never less than adequate–her early films reveal a surprisingly natural, “normal” young American woman.  Lively and attractive.  “Love is Better Than” even shows off some keen comedy chops.  But essentially it was a job.  She had four children by the age of 30, a mother and father to support and many friends to whom she was generous.  And she enjoyed the high life.  She made her great deals and her money when  the iron was hot. 

            Monroe was a tortured soul who felt powerfully that becoming a “real” actress would “complete” her.  She had no children, no family.  Her career was more than a mere job.  She did not yearn for the luxury items that Elizabeth felt were her due.  Monroe wanted respect.  She didn’t get it till her death.  And even that has been sullied by absurd and demeaning conspiracy theories. 

            But Rick–as to Betty Grable.  She was actually treated far better than Monroe.  She was no trouble ever, had a keen sense of her own worth, a family and extensive experience onstage and working in films before she hit it big in 1940.  Her roles were generally independent women who took no guff.  Sure, she was usually a singer/dancer, but still quite fiesty.  The industy admired her and so did Darryl Zanuck.  Of course that didn’t stop Zanuck from dropping her when she was 36, to further groom Monroe (whom he detested_ but…that’s Hollywood.)     Marilyn, with her childhood molestations, nude calendar and blatant posturing (she invented every pose you still see on red carpets today)  was considered a “case” right from the start–neurotic and troublesome.  She was so disliked by the high-ups at Fox that she was used in “There’s No Business Like Show Business” to literally mock her serious aspirations onscreen and be the butt of every rude and salacious comment in the script.  Grable never would have been so disrespected.

            Monroe capped it by leaving Hollywood, her contract and declaring herself seeking a new rode.   They had to bring her back on her own terms, but she was  never forgiven and (even worse) could not sustain her triumph.  Her personal demons–not the least of which was confusion and reliance on the image she had created–did her in.

            Elizabeth was in control of her career 100% after “Butterfield 8″   And she chose wisely for six years.  After “Taming of the Shrew” however, she began to go enjoyably off the rails.  But as Liza Minnelli said at the 1985 Golden Globes, “she was always the biggest star in the world.”

            8:53 am | May 30, 2011
          • Mr. Wow

            ….seeking a new road.  

            It would be nice be able to spell at this point in my life! 

            8:56 am | May 30, 2011
  • Baby Snooks

    And but of course her final “guest” would be herself. It makes perfect sense no matter how you feel about her.


    Oprah was always about Oprah.  From day one.  And will continue to be about Oprah. She’ll be back. On cable. And at the check-out stand at the grocery store. Next to the tabloids. The latter another example of her briliant marketing skills.  Madison Avenue couldn’t have promoted her better than she promoted herself. 

    There is chicken soup for the soul and snake oil for the soul,. And there’s a sucker born every minute.  Most of whom watched Oprah.  All of whom then went out and bought the snake oil.  

    “As seen on Oprah.”  That in itself guaranteed sales of the snake oil. Including Barack Obama.  Hillary didn’t stand a chance at that point.  It was over.  For everyone including John McCain.  Quite a few Republicans voted for him. And I bet they all watched Oprah.

    4:41 am | May 27, 2011
    • Mr. Wow

      Dear Baby…you are correct.  Like Old Man River, Miss O will keep rolling along. 

      I predict next weeks’s supermarket tabloids to run screaming front page stories—”Oprah Breaks Down After Final Show!  ‘I Want to Go Back!’ She Cries!” 

      As for dispensing snake oil, I’m afraid that an unfortunate fact of public life, no matter how sincere or altruistic one’s intentions are in the beginning.   I accept it and try to balance to good vs. the bad. 

      6:21 am | May 27, 2011
  • crystalclear

    Goody!  always happy to see a Mr. Wow thread.    I agree that Oprah has always been about Oprah using her guest list as personal therapy for herself.   In the beginning, I believe she, indeed, influenced young women that they could do better and should do better.   However, the endless shows on incest/child molestation went way over the top.  Then she went tabloid. 

    I believe Oprah has insecurity issues and nothing (not money) can make her happy.   She reminded me of a “wounded bird.”   Giving The Oprah Show an hour of my day Mon-Fri was something I was not willing to do.   As I mentioned on another topic watching her gain an enormous amount of weight (an extreme) to then losing an enormous amount of weight (size 5) showed an unstable side to her…an Oprah out of control emotionally.   In other words, losing the weight and instead of stopping at gaining 10 to 20 lbs back she went right back up to the high numbers.   That showed me a person who had to prove to themselves that they were in control.   This  seems to go hand in hand as a symptom to molestation at a young age.    Also, her years of promiscuity is another symptom of her molestation.   Poor soul.   I know she has struggled as many have and I am extremely sympathetic to those who have had to live with that memory.  

    Mr. Wow, I was not a fan of Oprah either.   As some said she became a strong role model to young women and  introduced The Book Club which recognized new writers promoting their writing careers.   She did do some things that made a difference.  Everyone has good qualities and not so good qualities.

    Perhaps I shouldn’t be so hard on her.    She sounds like a regular human being who is struggling in life to find the answers to her own problems.    

    6:28 am | May 27, 2011
    • Mr. Wow

      Dear CrystalC…what made me especially crazy was her insistence over the years that all the tabloids stories about her were untrue.  Then she’d have on some movie star, and ask them questions straight out of  the National Enquirer. 

      I still think she did more good than harm.  But the wholesale adoration is something that just escapes me.  And my opinion means less than nothing as O counts her billions and plans new ways to stun us with her good deeds in a naughty world.  I look to myself and say, “Mr Wow–get over it.  What the hell have you done to improve the human condition?”

      I met a woman in the elevator yesterday, and in two minutes we had an exchange that was so affecting and amusing and life-affirming I felt I’d know her all my life.  She lifted my day. 

      Maybe if I ever run into Oprah in an elevator….

      7:08 am | May 27, 2011
      • Baby Snooks

        Sorry but even the philanthropy was about promoting Oprah.  I was told she thanked Jesus on her final show. The “inner “Oprah was thanking PT Barnum.

        7:36 am | May 27, 2011
        • Baby Snooks

          And please. You are a mere mortal. Mere mortals are not allowed on the elevator with Oprah.

          7:44 am | May 27, 2011
          • Baby Snooks

            And by the way I had the weirdest dream about several of the ladies of wowOwow the other night and one of them introduced me to “you” as “Mr. Wow” and you in turn introduced yourself to me. Is the first initial of your name J?  If so your name rings a bell. Just don’t which church the bell was in.  There have been so many.

            8:00 am | May 27, 2011
          • Mr. Wow

            Dear Baby…first of all, when has Mr. Wow ever said he was a mere mortal? 

            But seriously…there is a J in my name, but it is not in my first name. 
            We’d know each other, I’m certain.
            And I’m always up at 4:00 a.m. myself. 

            10:00 am | May 27, 2011
          • Baby Snooks

            Oh. Well maybe I should go to New York and have lunch at Michael’s and see if I’m introduced to “J” who maybe is a “wow” although I hope I am not introduced in “real time” as the “biggest bitch on wowOwow.” 

            1:04 pm | May 27, 2011
          • Mr. Wow

            Dear Baby…

            Really?  You have always impressed me as fearless in your contentious nature, and I had imagined you’d be “Yes, I am a bitch!  Straight out!”  (As La Liz declared in “X Y and Zee”) 

            Now whether you think of yourself like that or not (I doubt you do–nor do I)  I want to feel confident you’d accept the words with a smile and then demolish whoever said it to you.  With a smile.

            1:36 pm | May 27, 2011
          • Baby Snooks

            Well a famous astrologer did nickname me Atilla the Nun so let’s just say the nun sometimes is a bitch to deal with and leave it at that.  

            5:37 pm | May 27, 2011
      • crystalclear

        Mr. Wow, you appear to have a very sweet side to your personality as revealed in your post to me above.   If you met Oprah in an elevator you would probably like her, too!  I do feel I was harsh on her because she has very often put her best foot forward.   She is human like the rest of us and had a strong tendency to chase the tabloid breaking news.   I will always believe that she will die an unfulfilled woman never having completely healed the enormous wound she carried around by being molested and going down the promiscuous path.   We  have our own deamons to explore and examine throughout our lives.  Some of us are able to come to terms with them early in life and move on.   Others have difficulty sorting through them and keep the deamons alive and well.   I wish everyone had the ability to put things in prospective  relative to the time of occurrence, write it down on paper, ball that piece of paper up and throw it away never to be thought of again.   My wish is that Oprah can get there one day.

        Thanks for putting up this thread.   It can get a bit slow around here for members who have a lot to say!!!

        9:00 am | May 27, 2011
  • Daniel Sugar

    Today, Shuttle astronauts announced they can see Oprah’s ego from space.

    6:44 am | May 27, 2011
    • Mr. Wow

      Dear Daniel….cute!

      7:09 am | May 27, 2011
    • Maizie James


      I laughed, and laughed reading your comment.

      Thanks! I needed it.

      6:25 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Andy
    Andy C

    Mr. Wow, I too don’t get her.  She’s become a parody of herself and yes, I agree, Daniel, that astronauts can see her ego from space.  She said “goodbye”, do you think she’ll really go?  One can only hope.

    7:11 am | May 27, 2011
    • Mr. Wow

      Dear Andy…where would she “”go?”  She’s what—57?   She ain’t retiring!   She’ll probably end up with a series of high-profile specials. 

      Remember–we don’t have to watch. 

      7:22 am | May 27, 2011
  • Jamie
    J G

    I have become much too intimidated and for some reason much too shy to post comments on Mr. Wow’s articles/commentaries. I also learned that I have been spelling Au Revoir wrong forever. My version has something to do with “your dog is nice”.
    Alas, I will continue to “like” Mr. Wow’s words of wit and whimsy to all 26 of my facebook friends.

    9:30 am | May 27, 2011
    • Mr. Wow

      Dear JG…Please don’t ever be intimidated by me!  Good Lord.  I love to hear from people, even those who don’t agree with me.  (I often learn from my critics.)

      If you’re shy, this is the place to open up. 

      10:06 am | May 27, 2011
  • Paul Smith

    No one who does television ever impresses. Ellen, Jay, Leno, Snooks, Chelsea, Monique, all proletarians. Oprah is one for the history books though, a nice bookend to the life of Madame C.J. Walker, herself a mesmerizing figure among African Americans, without the benefit of television and its ability to wipe away or soften cultural distinctions. The early shows of addressing the ills of the low rent gave way to the lucrative comforting of the troubled middle class female. Her fortune as the ultimate life coach was sealed. She has peaked, as there are no other major demographics to embrace her. The sometime and 2nd rate poet Maya Angelou speaking of Oprah’s humble birth in Christ-like imagery did nothing to win over fans. 

    9:43 am | May 27, 2011
  • Richard Bassett

    My God!!! What utter contempt for Oprah! I remember more kindness regarding Johnny Carson, who never really did anything for anyone: usually making fun of others, when he left TV. I guess that’s all it takes to be a talk show host. If this is true, Oprah exceeded those limits back in 1988. She was genuine (naive) when first interviewing in 1986 and didn’t have this ‘enormous ego’…which I’ve really, yet, to see. She certainly has a healthy ego with a lot of ongoing critical self -awareness but she’s not exactly Donald Trump, either. His mega ego is never seen as a detriment, while Oprah (no matter what means she uses) does help people. There is this: “I am going to save the world” attitude about her but even she realizes her limitations. SHE’S never announced a desire to run for President, without a trace of governmental experience. I’ve watched her a bit as she evolved and continued to make greater grand gestures to show her philanthropic side (which was usually pointed towards a person in distress instead of a non-profit/ cause) She helps catastrophe victims, or builds school, hospitals and seems to have her hand in just about everything. I really believe that she has surpassed her own ego. She has over a billion dollars and gives it (or a production company’s money) away. More power. Just the other day I compared her to Lucille Ball, who was given part of a studio to run after “I Love Lucy” terminated. She was back on television in less than two years and then realized that SHE couldn’t do it all and eventually sold the studio…to stay on TV. Oprah did the opposite. I think Oprah was being pulled apart many directions and something (like a daily talk show) had to go. I can’t weep because of a show (I hardly watched) floated away, knowing that Oprah will be on television (her ego!!!) again in five minutes. She’s the Michael Jackson of American housewives. Not an easy life to live. Do I get her? As much as anyone else, no more or less, than anyone with great resources.

    10:06 am | May 27, 2011
    • Baby Snooks

      Utter and complete contempt…

      1:06 pm | May 27, 2011
      • Richard Bassett

        My Dear Baby,
        Utter (used as a verb): air, announce, articulate,assert, aver, breathe, broach, circulate, come out with, communicate, declaim, declare, deliver, dicere, disclose, emit, enunicate, express, give expression to, give forth, impart, issue, make known, mouth, proclaim, propound, publicize, publish, recite, reveal, sound, speak,spread, state, talk, tell, vent, voice

        5:02 pm | May 28, 2011
        • Baby Snooks

          My God!!! What utter contempt for Oprah!

          My dear Richard. Correct your own grammar then!

          11:55 pm | May 28, 2011
          • Richard Bassett

            Baby, there was NO need too. Example: ‘I don’t want you to utter a word’, My sentence “What utter contempt..” I used the word as a verb;  this stuff is right from Webster’s! Unless you know have a better grammatical rule, the statement is correct! Baby, let’s end this discussion right here, no more posts. I do not want to be drawn into ‘utter contempt’ for you ;-)

            11:11 am | May 29, 2011
          • Briana Baran

            Baby, as an English, Grammar, and Literature major, may I correct Richard by stating that his use of the word “utter” in the phrase (not a sentence) “What utter contempt for Oprah!” contained the word in its form as an adjective, not a verb as in this definition found in the Free Online Dictionary (and also Websters Online): “ut·ter 2 (tr)
            Complete; absolute; entire: utter nonsense; utter darkness.” Or, as you said, “Utter and complete contempt”.

            I mean, if we’re going to be grammar and semantics Nazis, let’s do get it right, shall we?

            6:48 am | June 1, 2011
          • Richard Bassett


            Of course you woud be a grammar and literature, English teacher, LOL. What else would you be???  So, I can live with with C- (LOL)

            9:02 am | June 1, 2011
          • Briana Baran

            No, I never said an English teacher. I could never work within the restrictive and repressive confines of the current public school systems…and most private schools here are, mmm, parochial, and I am an iconoclastic agnostic, at best.

            But a very well and eclectically read English major who loves, and is fascinated with words and language, yes.

            1:08 pm | June 1, 2011
          • Irreverent

            Darn it! Beaten to the punch…
            (I couldn’t find my wowOwow password; I tried to reset it; wowOwow sent me the wrong key to try to reset the password; I e-mailed wowOwow to let them know; never got a reply from them; I eventually found my password, only to find Briana beautifully corrected Richard on his use of the word “utter”…) 

            Anyway, this is what I was going to say (and am still saying):

            Utter (when used as an adjective): complete; absolute.

            Examples of utter used as a verb:
            Why utter such contempt for …?
            Let’s not utter contempt for …
            What do we gain by uttering contempt for …?

            Examples of utter used as an adjective:
            What utter contempt!
            Utter and complete contempt!
            Let me express my utter contempt for … (NOTE: not to be confused with “Let me utter my contempt for …”, where utter is used as a verb, not an adjective).

            Again, as Briana said, Baby is absolutely correct in her use of the phrase “Utter and complete contempt!”

            12:37 am | June 2, 2011
          • Richard Bassett

            Can we please think of something more interesting to write about? You should have kept your password lost, Irrelevant. The sentence I used as a template was: “I do not want you to utter a sound” If I’ve used it incorrectly…it’s over. I’m sorry to offend so many. Just do what you do best and read the the posts.


            6:37 am | June 2, 2011
          • crystalclear

            Richard, I AGREE!    I prefer to use “udderly” whenever possible LOL!

            6:50 am | June 2, 2011
          • Irreverent

            Sorry, but as Briana pointed out, “If we’re going to be grammar and semantics Nazis, let’s do get it right.”

            In the sentence you used as template, utter is a verb because it describes the action (verb = action).

            In your and Baby’s phrase, utter is an adjective because it describes the word contempt (adjective = describes or modifies the noun).


            Now, since I’ve no reason to dislike you, and I actually thoroughly enjoy (most) of your posts, I shall not address the rest of this post and merely go on my merry way….

            Peace!! ^_^

            9:19 am | June 2, 2011
  • Mr. Wow

    Dear Paul…

    Excellent.   Maya works my nerves even more than Oprah.

    But I admit I’m still enjoying Chelsea Handler, though any second now she’ll tip over into Kathy Griffin territory and her goose will be cooked too.

    10:11 am | May 27, 2011
    • Baby Snooks

      Don’t get me started on Maya Angelou.  Suffice it to say I can see why they’re friends. 

      1:08 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Jamie
    J G

    Thank you Mr. Wow. You have given me back a little of my confidence….

    It has always bothered me that Oprah’s hero Maya was given (seemingly given) credit for the following poem. As you can see, she didn’t write it at all…..The proper credit should be given to poet Paul Lawrence Dunbar….
    I KNOW what the caged bird feels, alas!
    When the sun is bright on the upland slopes;
    When the wind stirs soft through the springing grass,
    And the river flows like a stream of glass;
    When the first bird sings and the first bud opes,
    And the faint perfume from its chalice steals —
    I know what the caged bird feels!

    I know why the caged bird beats his wing
    Till its blood is red on the cruel bars;
    For he must fly back to his perch and cling
    When he fain would be on the bough a-swing;
    And a pain still throbs in the old, old scars
    And they pulse again with a keener sting —
    I know why he beats his wing!

    I know why the caged bird sings, ah me,
    When his wing is bruised and his bosom sore,—
    When he beats his bars and he would be free;
    It is not a carol of joy or glee,
    But a prayer that he sends from his heart’s deep core,
    But a plea, that upward to Heaven he flings —
    I know why the caged bird sings!

    The above poem was published in Lyrics of the Hearthside by Dodd, Mead and Company in 1899. It was this poem that inspired the title to Maya Angelou’s autobiography I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings.

    10:23 am | May 27, 2011
    • Mr. Wow

      Dear JG…
      There!  Not being a great fan of Maya, I did always assume she’d written the poem–though I’m sure if I’d paid closer attention I would have understood she hadn’t. 

      You mustn’t be shy here.  This is where to let it all hang out.  And I don’t  mean only at  my posts.  Lots of good stuff happening on WoW.  And everywhere, these days.  Got an opinion?  There’s a place for it.

      I’m shy and wracked  with insecurities. But given the proper impetus, I can step outside my fretful self and be…well, maybe the person I should be, all the time.  And maybe someday I’ll step outside and never come back in.

      1:24 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Steve C

    I never “got” Oprah either.  She seems like a smart, nice, lady.  But a billionaire media titan who wields amazing power over the American public?  An intellectual and cultural genius who can make or break a book, a movie, a career…with one minute of praise?  I think her true genius was tapping into what many successful people of today know.  There are a great number of Americans who have a sheep-like mentality.  They are too lazy to think for themselves and want to be told what to eat, what to watch, who to vote for, what to read, who is interesting, what is bad, what is good, and how to think.  Kudos to Oprah for stepping up to the plate and taking the bull by the horns.  To her credit at least she used her power for some good and got people to read. (Anna Karenina sat on library shelves for generations collecting dust, just waiting to be picked up, and Oprah told the public it was good and everyone rushed out to read it.) If she told them a cup of dirt a day was good for the digestion thousands of woman would run out to the back yards and shovel the stuff into their mouths.  I was never a regular viewer, but I caught her show from time to time–how could I not?  And I did find her to come across as genuine with an open, easy, comfortable personality.  She brought some important issues to the forefront.  And it WAS comforting to know she was there.   For the record, I “get” Marilyn.  Now if someone could explain Dr. Phil, Lady Gaga, and Donald Trump to me.

    2:02 pm | May 27, 2011

    I for one (only one apparently) will miss Miss Oprah, she taught me alot of things her topics were
    timely graphic and detailed.

    She also had her lighter side you can’t be serious every day, when she went on her see America
    in her Chevrolet episodes it was a barrell of laughs.  

    I don’t know what it is but some people never have anything nice to say about anybody or anything
    and I don’t mean you MR WOW.

    Life will go on surely , but I feel a spark has been put out

    2:11 pm | May 27, 2011

    p.s. great picture of Oprah

    2:29 pm | May 27, 2011
    • crystalclear

      Hi Small Town Girl.   Even though I am not a fan of Oprah, I agree that the picture of her is flattering.   She photographs well.     After reading the comments here it is clear that we either like her or we don’t for different reasons.

      If she has inspired some of you then that is a positive!  I haven’t watched her show in years and have never been over to her OWN network.    I watch very little TV.

      6:52 am | May 28, 2011
  • J Holmes

    I seldomed watched Oprah but totally understand why so many liked her.  I admire her for what she accomplished.  I totally get why there were no guests on final show, made sense to me reminded me of when Johnny Carson had his final show. 

    2:55 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Deirdre Cerasa

    Mr. WoW!! Loved the article! Adore Marilyn. I am always thrilled whenever one of her movies is on; even those considered “not so good”. As you say “she got better”.

    3:09 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Elizabeth Bennett

    Much of the time I didn’t get it, like her relentless fascination with one celebrity after another or her shows on child abuse, which were not fun to watch. However, when she said “My favorite things are not things at all,” she had me. She dealt with so many issues and so many different personalities in popular culture. I just wish she had been more literate in the sciences as well as literature and pop culture; she could have completely transformed the country.

    4:38 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Rho

    I did not watch her much, but I do admire her making so much money.  She came from nothing, and got very rich.  I couldn’t do that, not many people could.

    4:43 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Daniel Sugar

    Thanks, Maizie!

    6:36 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Frau Quink

    Since nobody is perfect, I always take away the best from people.
    I don’t have to be an Oprah fan to realize that the is a selfmade woman.
    I definitely respect her for that alone. She also has done a lot for
    many people by being very generous. Nothing wrong with that.
    And if I would not believe in the absolute power of positive thinking,
    I would have given up a long time ago.
    So, kudos to Oprah!

    7:32 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Bethany Christian

    I think they should start sainthood proceedings in Rome immediately :) :) :)

    8:38 pm | May 27, 2011
  • mary burdt

    Nobody has mentioned the Oprah Magazine. It is my favorite magazine and look forward to it every month. Well written and filled with information…some thought provoking and others, just fun. What is wrong with that? Oprah IS a star and, in my thinking, deserves

    the love and respect she gets. My thoughts, my opinion.

    9:29 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Maizie James

    Let me explain [one of several reasons] why …”I don’t get Oprah”.

    I began to suspect her being somewhat shallow, and perhaps disingenuous after the launching of O magazine. Oprah’s masterly re-touched photos on the cover of all her magazine confirmed for me that she was pathologically narcissistic. I’ve speculated that perhaps at her core she wanted to be a glamorous beauty queen/movie star? What else could have been her driving psychological motive; or business motive?

    Her photo on every cover didn’t make sense because my brain tells me that as the magazine’s owner, if her sincere intent was indeed to help the many ‘victims’ featured on her show, then the monthly covers would have feature one of the many individuals [for the cover story] whose plight she wanted to bring to the public’s attention. Or, her cover/cover story would focus on her philanthropy. Even with her book club, she would have a cover/cover story featuring the author of the books she promoted. Does this make sense?

    No. I think Oprah is a great performer, with an insatiable appetite to feed her vanity … or her insecurities. Incidentally, I saw her in THE COLOR PURPLE, and in THE WOMEN OF BREWSTER PLACE. Both roles were good performances. Yet, neither allowed her an opportunity to play a glamorous movie star.

    As for her final show, it was a grand performance by a woman who had the money and power to extol glory, extravagance, and worship upon herself – a performance worthy of an academy award. Or, an absolution of the private suffering she’s endured.

    I do not envy her. Instead, I feel sorrow for her.

    9:56 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Maizie James

    *In all fairness, I’ve rarely watched daytime talk shows over the years because I was too busy. It is not just the Oprah show that I disliked. I simply PREFER talk shows of substance; shows that air in the evening after the business of the day. For instance, I’ve watched Charlie Rose since he debuted.

    Yet, I was curious and decided to watch Oprah after reading about her growing success. To my dismay, the few shows I’ve watched [less than ten], I tuned in on programs where the topic was about OPRAH! In fact, the very first Oprah show I saw featured a telephone exchange with Stedman as he explained why he wanted her to loose weight! Obviously, you can understand why I avoided watching for another few years.

    The second Oprah show I saw featured an auction she was having. She invited viewers into her huge wardrobe! Then there were a few shows where she exploited someone. For example, there was a young child suffering from a rare disease, which accelerated their aging. It seemed like a ‘freak show’.

    Again, I just ‘happened’ upon shows which were pure tabloid, or shows specifically about Oprah’s problems/weight. Thus, it’s accurate to admit that I probably missed all the ‘good shows’!

    What it comes down to is choice. Most of us tune in on programming that we enjoy. And, Oprah and all the rest of the daytime host were simply not the type of programming I prefer.

    10:28 pm | May 27, 2011
    • Maizie James

      Ps: I’ve only seen ‘The View’ once! I couldn’t get beyond the bickering from women who are not experts on the topics they fought about.

      Opinion/gossip is ok … when having lunch with friends. Whereas fact, and expertise is best found on PBS News Hour/Washington Week, or Charlie Rose. Not cable, not the networks. Now, I can handle 60 Minutes, but that’s about it.

      10:46 pm | May 27, 2011
      • Baby Snooks

        Don’t get me started on Barbara Walters either…

        11:44 pm | May 27, 2011
  • Lizzie R.

    (Whew…I’ve been trying for 5 hrs to log in…why am I always forgotten?)

    I have a friend who adores Ophah, and I cannot stand her. I have only watched her a few times and felt she was always self serving in all she did. Guess with her you either love her or dislike her.. I know she has done a lot for others, but feel, even then, it’s done for a selfish purpose more than altruistic. I am so mad about  her OWN chanel, as a  Discovery chanel  i enjoyed was sacrificed for hers. Now you just get her, and more her, Dr. Phil. and a few other things Suppose it will continue on in the same mode, perhaps with more of her, if possible. Cannot believe she has really disappeared from network TV, as she will need the exposure soon to satisfy her monstrous ego.

    1:58 am | May 28, 2011
  • Jessie Bowdoin

    Interesting reading Mr. Wow’s post and his replies. I would not like to endure the scrutiny of the rich and famous that goes along with that territory. If I could good things for deserving people incognito like on the “The Millionaire” show decades ago, I would. To have my everything I do or don’t do up for public judgement or opinion, etc., no thank you.
      My observation of the famous Miss O- To each their own. I personally stopped ordering her magazine for that reason someone said earlier. She was always on the cover. Too many ads geared toward the wealthy. Found out that I could get the good articles on line at her website.
     Didn’t like the way she would interrupt her guests. Yes, I watched quite a lot of shows. But I will find something good to do at 4pm M-F.
    Yes, she did good work for encouraging reading. Helping authors. Building schools, helping schools. Building homes, etc. Thousands have gratitude  for her help and her sponsors & viewers.
     Now we all sit here wondering when she’ll start a show on her network that has her as the host. Any bets?

    2:12 pm | May 28, 2011
  • Mr. Wow

    A thought for all those who have said even Oprah’s philanthropy was “about herself” and not terribly sincere.


    If somebody puts up their name and face (and most vitally) their money to help educate, to wipe out a disease, to assist the victims of disaster, to lift the quality of life, who cares if they are sincere?    Mr. Wow is a sincere guy.  But I am not rich nor am I especially altruistic. (I’ve had my moments, but few and far between)   Is my “sincerity” worth more than Oprah’s ego?   I’d say the people who have been on the recieving end of Oprah’s generosity would prefer her ego.  (“My child needs an education.  But Oprah–what a faker.  She’s offering to help.  What a phony.  I’ll just chat with sincere Mr. Wow, who can’t do a damn thing for me.”)

    I, too, felt Oprah’s charity was more about making herself feel good, better, the biggest and best.  If that’s what it takes for people with money and power to contribute, bring on the egomaniacs. 

    I am of a similar mindset about politicians–I don’t care what they “really feel.”  I care what they really do.  

    3:43 pm | May 28, 2011
    • Baby Snooks

      My observation through the years has been that most “celebrity philanthropy” is about short-term “public relations” rather than long-term solutions. Sorry.

      The exception is Elizabeth Taylor. I am amazed by the number of people who didn’t even know she had her own foundation.

      4:05 pm | May 28, 2011
      • Mr. Wow

        Dear Baby..

        again, I can only say so what?  A  celeb decides to raise his or her profile by donating millions to a cause  o r sending money to a disaster area?   Where is the downside for the people being helped?

        As long as the money gets to where it should go, I couldn’t care less if the Big Giver really cares. 

        It’s a wonderful thing when those who  indulge in public charity giving are the real deal and truly care.  But, human nature being what it is…I still say it’s better to give and be a phony.  Just don’t take it back!

        4:23 pm | May 28, 2011
        • Baby Snooks

          We will disagree. Although I assume we don’t disagree about Elizabeth Taylor.  As for the disaster relief, if I were one of the celebrities that donated to the Bush-Clinton Haiti Fund, I would be demanding to know where my money went. So far very little of the hundreds of millions of dollars has gone to Haiti. But then, well, there you have the phony part. They really don’t care. They gave the money, got the “good public relations” and really could care less about the people in Haiti. And it’s the same with everything else. They really don’t care beyond the moment of the giving. And so there are no real solutions to problems. Just good public relations for an ego. 

          12:09 am | May 29, 2011
          • Mr. Wow

            Dear Baby…Elizabeth was the real deal, in action and in her heart.

            8:20 am | May 30, 2011
  • lsmyers

    I think what makes Oprah the force she is, is knowing only she can indulge herself on her terms. She has created the Midas touch of providing opportunities to others, rather than carrying people herself. She achieves her dreams and desires and if they happen to create a larger circle of others than so be it. Nobody loses in the process. I do not get any warm fuzzies from Oprah herself though what she has done for others I have felt. The OWN network itself right now is in a holding pattern until she molds it into a new vision, which I am sure is well laid out to be unfolded. She is smart and takes the pieces from those she has met and connected with to create the person she is first and foremost knowing the ripple affect in the process. Regardless of opinion, everyone carries an opinion about her which good or bad strengthens her own energy and means of taking the next step. Has anyone else really matched her ability to influence or stand as they are in choices made, I can’t really think of another presently in her field who does.

    12:43 am | May 29, 2011
  • Karen Ferguson

    I’ve had a soft spot for Mr. Wow ever since I saw how his modesty makes it difficult for him to accept compliments, that he doesn’t seem to know how well he writes. Maybe that’s why he can be gallant regarding Oprah, who seems to know how well she does everything. Way back when she was taking a third-place talk show up to first, and her cheery acknowledgement of her flaws, like her weight and how she looks without makeup, she made viewers feel included in her success. I liked her show when I left to live in Europe and was taken aback when, on a return trip, I tuned in years later to see that her message had changed, from inclusion to exclusion, from inundating viewers with the message that she was best. She didn’t lunch with ladies; she lunched with Legends, and the gift bags with $500,000 earrings at their plates seemed all too Marie-Antoinette for me. I don’t know which irritated me more –the diamonds or the fact she gave them to friends she called the “young’uns,” the kind of uncomfortably derogatory name she gave to Halle Berry and Michelle Obama. Then came the Hermes episode. When I came to Paris, I was horribly intimidated by going to the little exclusive shops, and had to bite my lip when a French “real lady,” a former model, suggested we make a day of it shopping and invited me over to do my makeup, accessorize my suit, and then encourage me to be confident and smiling as she led me into one of the shops. So Oprah shows up fifteen minutes after closing in a jogging suit? If that weren’t a metaphor for entitlement her pal Gail certainly gave one when she pretentiously complained about what a good client Ophrah had been, with “all” the Birkin bag purchases (at $9,000 to $150,000 a pop). I guess the clincher for me was the long-lost-sister incident, when Oprah’s voice broke on-air about how people in her family had betrayed her privacy to the press –on a show for which she’d aired international promo’s touting “her” secret, and dissed her own mother for being embarrassed about the revelation of something she felt shame about, something she’d kept hidden for decades. Not to mention the long-lost-sister herself, who’d asked for nothing but had to endure the Ten Ton Oprah publicity and Oprah’s touted reticence about befriending her until she tested the waters. I know that promotion is the name of the game now, but since I don’t much admire the game I find it hard to admire the winner. Mr. Wow is a much better person than I am, able to voice his respect for Ophrah’s success; I’ll just go off to my corner knowing I’m a curmudgeon. Still, I can’t help but feel sadness that a real “spiritual” achiever –a Mother Teresa or a Gandhi– would never be able attract the thousands that crowded into that good-bye stadium audience in gratitude for Ophrah’s spiritual guidance. But then they were never offering a new Chevy apiece.

    1:19 am | May 29, 2011
  • crystalclear

    Has no one mentioned Oprah’s school in Africa?   What was that all about?   Why didn’t she open that school in America?   That confused me.

    6:52 am | May 29, 2011
    • Baby Snooks

      As other celebrities have discovered, you get more press coverage in the villages of Africa than you do in the slums in America.

      7:55 am | May 29, 2011
  • omasan

    Mr. Wow, thank you for your article. Neither Oprah or Marilyn Monroe need any kind of defense or explanation. They are both wonderful in my opinion. If you don’t like them, don’t watch them. To those of you who hate on others so much–I think you really need to ask yourself why you dislike someone so strongly–chances are that whatever you hate most about them is what you most hate about yourself.

    3:19 pm | May 29, 2011
    • crystalclear

      Omason, I don’t agree that people actually hate either one in any way.   It’s a personality choice.   Some people we are drawn to and others we are not for various reasons.   For some, Oprah crossed a line and for others they admired and hung on to her every word.   Same for Marilyn Monroe.   In fact, these two women are like comparing apples to oranges and both of them are and were quite different.   So, there you have it….two very different women who were admired or not by many different personalities.

      I wouldn’t say anyone here hates either woman.  

      7:06 am | May 31, 2011
  • Deborah Key

    @Crystal:  Oprah did open a school in the US.    Why do you assume that she did not? 

    12:51 pm | May 30, 2011
    • crystalclear

      Deborah:    Why would you assume that she did?   LOL! It’s always helpful to do a bit of research before stating that she did open a school in the US.   There’s absolutely no data to support that statement.  

        If Oprah had opened a special school let us say, in Chicago, for underprivileged children TRUST ME there would’ve been huge attention drawn to it….by Oprah herself.    I haven’t read anything about Oprah opening a school in America….only Africa….the one where the molestation took place.

      If you have a link to support that she did open a school in the US I would be interested in reading that information.    I’ll wait for your reply.   Personally, if I had Oprah’s money I would’ve helped children here in the US first….African American children.

      Thanks for responding to my post and I look forward to your reply.   I don’t have a problem with being wrong and then learning from it.

      1:18 pm | May 30, 2011
  • Testarosa

    Thanks for the balance, Mr. Wow! Though I have never been an Oprah follower and, quite frankly, (also) never “got” her, I believe she deserves plenty of credit for having broken all manner of barriers — both of the personal and the “hot potato” kind. She also seems to have a big and generous heart (more power to that). At times, however, I have found her gullibility astonishing and even unsettling. Over the years, she has allowed herself to be influenced by an array of unaccredited quacks and C-list celebrities whose vast “research” makes them self-described experts on specific medical/health/well-being issues. Unfortunately, what this woman says, promotes and even mentions in passing is considered “gospel” to those among her more ardent fan base.

    As a mother, I have major issues with Jenny McCarthy being allotted time to rant about her anti-vaccination theories. And, as a two-time breast cancer patient, I deeply resented Suzanne Somers being given a platform from which to air her disdain for conventional oncology courses of treatment. I am still around today because of chemo- and adjuvant-therapies.

    It’s funny. I’ve watched Oprah maybe three or four times in my life. I have no disrespect for her millions of fans. I guess it’s just a case of my having seen all-too-many controversial clips for my liking.

    As a mother, I

    7:52 pm | May 30, 2011
    • Baby Snooks

      The worst of the legacy of Oprah is not the “gurus” who tell us how to live perfect lives by following their “wisdom” but the “experts” who have misled millions with regard to illness and disease and the treatment of disease. That alone is why I finally “turned her off.”

      Anything for ratings. And for the money that rolled in with those ratings. As the years rolled by, she created the gurus she then promoted. All the while promoting mainly herself.

      As everyone knows, I say what I feel. The Surgeon General should have insisted on a disclaimer in the opening credits of her shows.  “Warning: The information provided by guests on this show are not based on credible science and may prove hazardous to your mental and physical health.”

      I think the worst was Deepak Chopra.  I have not forgotten, or ever will, his stating on Larry King that he knew Michael Jackson was an addict and that doctors were overprescribing for him. He shoujld have reported the matter to the medical board in Sacramento. Which might have saved Michael Jackson’s life in the end. 

      Every time I see a product with the “As Seen on Oprah” I steer clear of it. Just because of the “As Seen on Oprah.” Unfortunately I didn’t do so with Barack Obama.

      2:44 am | May 31, 2011
      • crystalclear

        Baby, like you, when I see a product “As Seen On Oprah” I shake my head.  The companies give Oprah the products to promote for which she gets paid whether she likes the product or not and once she gives it the thumbs up sales soar.   That, in itself, isn’t bad, because it is the world of advertising products but somehow it seemed to be all about Oprah’s ego.

        I watched OWN for the first time over the weekend.   I can’t say I liked or disliked it and I might watch it again to get more of a feel for it.   There are many interesting comments here pro and con about Oprah but one thing is for certain….the woman knows how to make money.  She also surrounds herself with talented people i.e. producers, directors, writers, etc. and they are all women.

        I have this soft spot on in my heart when I learn of bad things happening to good people and I believe Oprah falls into that category as a very young woman.   Look where she is today.

        I can’t imagine that there will ever be another Oprah Winfrey.    She’s one of a kind.   Whether or not we like her is meaningless.   Her success speaks volumes.
        Baby Snooks, many of us were duped by Barack Obama.   He keeps making George Bush look better and better for the history books.  

        I’m more than ready to face 2012 to vote Obama out of office.   One term president. 

        6:47 am | May 31, 2011
        • Mr. Wow

          Dear Crystal…Obama might be a disappointment (not to me–but I knew better, even tho I voted for him) but he has yet to make GW Bush appear in a more favorable light. 

          Of course, there is still time for that.  I won’t swear it can’t happen.  Anything can happen.

          1:34 pm | May 31, 2011
          • crystalclear

            Hi Mr. Wow!   Well, now, President Obama so far as mirrored GWB to a “T.”  That was the point I was making but, yes, anything can happen.   Now, hurry and put up another juicy thread for us to chew on.    I like the company you keep on your threads…great posters with excellent comments.   You bring out the best in people even when I don’t agree with them.   You folks are wonderful to hang with.

            Time for Sarah Palin and her “One Nation Bus Tour.”   tee hee 

            5:15 pm | May 31, 2011
          • Baby Snooks

            Well she was on a bike tour the other day. Told a reporter from FOX news that she loved the smell of motorcycle exhaust. Whatever.  At least we know she doesn’t sniff glue. Just tailpipes.

            8:44 pm | May 31, 2011
          • Briana Baran

            Carbon monoxide causes brain damage. Good thing Mrs. Palin doesn’t have much to worry about…

            7:18 am | June 1, 2011
    • crystalclear

      Testarosa, loved your post! 

      6:48 am | May 31, 2011
      • Testarosa

        Am reposting my reply because it has been in moderation “limbo” since about 10:30 this morning. Thanks for that, crystal clear. BTW, your moniker suits you to a tee: you come across as a real straight-shooter (something I like and respect in a person).

        FWIW, my original reply contained a link to a Newsweek article (search words: Oprah Winfrey + Live Your Best Life Ever). It is quite long but, even by reading a few paragraphs, one can get the gist of the authors’ message: heeding health advice doled out on the Oprah Show could make you sick.

        3:51 pm | May 31, 2011
    • Mr. Wow

      Dear Testarosa…
      I agree!  And I also think Oprah should have apologized for her relentless promoting of diets and workouts and crap that never really worked for her, yet she encouraged millions to spend millions (and valuable  time) following her lead.   Maybe she did, this season?
      I class Jenny McCarthy (well-meaning though she is) in with Suzanne Somers.  And as to the latter–please, you look “younger” because you’ve exploded your entire face with Botox and Restalyne.  And that chest!  Fine–everything is  a personal choice.  Just be honest.  Kind of. 

      1:28 pm | May 31, 2011
      • Testarosa

        Glad you agree, Mr. Wow. Whatever works for Jenny McCarthy and Suzanne Somers is fine by me (especially in Ms. McCarthy’s case as I am well aware of her son’s autism): it’s their preaching and conversion efforts that wear me down and, ultimately, give me the pip. BTW, your summation of Ms. Somers’ “youthful” look is very well-observed — neither unfair nor overreaching.

        Keep up the great work. From one who ALWAYS looks forward to your posts.

        4:14 pm | May 31, 2011
        • Briana Baran

          Jenny McCarthy’s son is not autistic, and never was. He has a seizure disorder, and it has nothing to do with his vaccination schedule. She is not well meaning…she conspired with his former doctor to allow the falsification of his medical records to indicate autism spectrum disorder. When this was discovered, the doctor lost his hospital position and his medical license. He know sells his “cure” for autism (which is a manageable condition…through various kinds of therapy….not by any means all pharmaceutical, and highly dependent on the individual…but not “curable”) for thousands and thousands of dollars to the desperate and gullible. No insurance will cover it, or reputable psychological, medical, or neurological specialist recommend it. Also, the critical outbreaks of mumps, measles and whooping cough in areas in which parents are refusing to vaccinate based on the long debunked belief that mercury in vaccinations causes autism (medical research of large populations disproved this in Japan in the 1960′s and ’70′s…and vaccinations don’t contain mercury at all anymore, yet autism diagnoses hold steady or are on the rise) can be largely attributed to all of the millions of people who watched Ms. McCarthy’s pronouncement, and Oprah’s tacit endorsement, on their televisions. Far, far too many people are star-struck enough to believe celebrity experts over medical researchers, their own doctors, and empirical facts.

          7:10 am | June 1, 2011
          • Testarosa

            Briana: I am completely gobsmacked by what you have written in reply. I well and truly had no idea. When I singled out Jenny McCarthy, I was trying to inject a bit of balance and fairness into my otherwise pretty withering assessment. Definitely should have done a little homework. I certainly have no reason to doubt you but, if her son is indeed non-autistic, this is all an utterly shameful state of affairs.

            Like you, I worry about the legions of Oprah fans who are choosing not to vaccinate their children because of what Jenny McCarthy has espoused. On a more personal level, I also fret about how many might have opted to refuse chemotherapy (or any of the “miracle” adjuvant therapies available) after watching Suzanne Somers rant against traditional courses of cancer treatment. In my case, it was a no-brainer: when your oncologist says to you “it’s a case of life or death”, you choose life and (temporarily) surrender to those who truly do know better — or even best.

            Thanks again for your post: they say you learn something new every day and, in this instance, I think I’ve had (what Oprah would call) an “aha” moment.

            10:34 am | June 1, 2011
          • Briana Baran

            Testarosa, I appreciate your post and your candor. I have a 20 year old son who has autism spectrum disorder. His step-father and I have gone through pure hell convincing my former in-laws that quack cures don’t work, and that there is no one to sue. The vast majority of medical researchers and neurologists now believe that the increase in diagnoses of autism, which is highly variable, and causes actual changes in brain structure that could only occur in utero (hence, not from vaccinations) is some environmental factor affecting chromosomes, particularly in males, whose gametes are much more vulnerable.

            Suzanne Somers not only may have caused incalculable damage with her ridiculous and unfounded outcry against traditional cancer treatments (and I have several much loved people still in my life because of these treatments), but also with her “female” macrobiotic, macro-vitamin, and topical hormone treatments. Two female gynecologists and my therapist (all of whom are proponents of holistic and natural methods that in no way financially benefit them) warned me off of Ms. Somers methodology, because the high vitamin doses can be lethally toxic, and the hormones can cause blistering, severe burns, permanent scarring, and even be fatally toxic for certain women. Way to go Suzanne…and way to go Oprah.

            And Oprah is no role model for over-weight or obese women who suffer from anxiety, depression, or dysmorphia issues. She wears her dysfunctions like a badge of pride, her breakdowns and weight gains as a banner of attention-seeking and self-pity, and her “triumphant” losses as as some sort of victorious endorsements for various useless weight-loss and dieting plans and supplements. I find that truly disgusting.

            As for her school in Africa, I don’t discount it…but the people who most desperately need the eduction in the pit of Hell that is sub-Saharan Africa are the boys. They have to be taught to be conscious, to respect others, that the rest of the civilized world doesn’t accept, condone, or approve of rape, and brutalization, and chattel law, and women as less than human. It’s all well and good to educate a select few girls…but what happens when you send those very few out into the same old culture of brute force and ignorant, rutting, violent, uneducated males? Men are human too, and it will take both sexes in the hell holes of the world to make improvements.

            And yes, I have to wonder why so many celebrities choose vile corners of the world to make small, but extremely splashy charitable statements. Well, no I don’t. People praise an Oprah for her school (molestation be damned), or an Angelina Jolie for her exotic kiddie collection, or Madonna for foreign child purchases…but when Sandra Bullock goes through four years of absolutely normal adoptions procedures, merely asking for an orphaned infant, race, gender and place of origin unimportant, and keeps it private, and then ends up with an orphaned black infant from New Orleans that the agency matched HER with…she’s somehow condemned for buying herself a pet “N” word. Really? Just as an example, on a list of donors to both the Haiti and Japanese disasters, Ms. Bullock was one of the top contributors…but you won’t know this unless you stumble across it by accident. Ms. Jolie made sure the cameras got all of the right angles…so she’s an angel of mercy.

            As Mr. Wow stated, in a sense, it doesn’t matter why the contributions are made, especially when they truly bring aid and relief to those in need (think Bill Gates, who everyone loves to hate, and his quest to bring the ravages of malaria to an end). But sometimes the manner and type of contributions is merely self-agrandizing…and doesn’t truly serve a far-reaching or significant purpose.

            1:42 pm | June 1, 2011
          • crystalclear

            Briana, great post.   You have a distinct way of making your point.   Love reading your posts!

            I have a problem with Angelina Jolie….always have.   Loved your choice of words above “exotic kiddy collection.”    Nailed it, Briana! 

            4:12 pm | June 1, 2011
      • Briana Baran

        Jenny McCarthy well-meaning? O, Mr. Wow, she was involved in fraud right from the start. And the only thin was boosting her she was interested in doing was, mmm, boosting her sagging popularity and insuring her place in the limelight. I find using one’s own child to regain “Star Status”, especially by putting him through a rigorous quack cure for a condition he doesn’t have based on documents you know have been falsified absolutely disgusting.

        Now thousands, if not millions of people are at risk from diseases that can blind, cause severe brain damage, and kill. Diseases that were under control. And autism research took a sucker punch to the balls. Nice work, Oprah and Jenny.

        7:16 am | June 1, 2011
  • crystalclear

    Testarose, when I was responding to one of your posts just before clicking  “submit” I noticed I had spelled your name TESTOSTERONEROSA.    Honest to God…I cannot lie LOL!  

    5:17 pm | May 31, 2011
    • Testarosa

      Crystal Clear, you definitely gave me a laugh-and-a-half with that near-gaffe. And, FWIW, I assure you I am not a testosterone-fuelled Wow-O-Wow “troll”. :-) ))

      5:46 pm | May 31, 2011
  • crystalclear

    Laughter is soooo good for the soul!   Of course you are not a troll! 

    6:22 am | June 1, 2011
  • Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <br> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <i> <img alt="" align="" border="" class="" height="" hspace="" longdesc="" vspace="" src="" style="" width=""> <ins datetime="" cite=""> <li> <ol> <p> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <u> <ul>