OT: wondering why

Maybe because Oprah was much more visual about the endorsement and made sure it was seen and heard all over the airwaves, showed up at all the rallies which made all the news and made a big deal out of appearing with Caroline Kennedy.

With Ellen DeGeneres and Jerry Springer it was just mentioned as a one liner in someone's column.

Lucille

Springer announced his endorsement on ET and DeGeneres did a satelite link to a rally for Hillary. It might not have been as much, but it was more than a one liner.

Elizabeth

Are you serious?? LOL. I hadn't heard that, particularly with regard to Jerry Springer. I can just imagine the calibre of voters he will attract; I can't wait to be at the polling station when some of his crazies come in to cast their ballot, and run into their boyfriends' mistresses, and vice versa.!

Gill

I stand corrected. I don't have satellite so I never saw anything about Ellen until I read it in the newspaper a few days ago and I only saw the Springer endorsement once, probably on ET. I keep seeing a slew of Hollywood names in connection with Obama, especially on the net, and not so many connected with Clinton.

I also believe that Oprah really can move and shake people like few others can. I'm possibly one of the few people who aren't enamored with Oprah, but I know she's certainly loved by many.

I DO NOT watch his show but please don't think of him as in idiot. He once said in an interview that he personally would never watch a show of that caliber if he wasn't making a fortune doing it. I admire someone who admits that he's doing something strictly for the money and isn't BSing about whether it's good or bad.

He was the Mayor of Cleveland, or Cincinnati (or some big city that starts with a C) at one time.

Lucille

Springer's not running, he was endorsing Hillary Clinton.

Well, in my book, Jerry Springer is a joke and I hadn't heard about ED's support. Same complaint, but Oprah has the biggest audience between her show and her magazine.

You know - I was going ET? - extra terrestrial? Springer? Well, it does fit. I only know DeGeneres as the voice of the ditsy fish in Finding Nemo.

I've never understood the Oprah mystique. Her book picks never resonated with me and I never liked the show.

Cheryl

Extra-terrestrial might describe both Springer and Ellen very nicely, but the show I was referencing was Entertainment Tonight. It's mostly Hollywood gossip and fun to watch, and completely and totally devoid of anything remotely intellectual.

With Oprah's book choices, I read two of them and neither one was my taste but she does get people to read and I guess that's important so she deserves respect. The few times I watched her show I felt like I was in a strange land where everything is beautiful and faith could move a mountain. It's fine if you're a believer, but not for me.

Lucille

Replying to myself -- oops, I just re-read your post and realize I misinterpreted it before replying; apologies for thinking you misunderstood what Dr. Brat wrote.

I did figure that out, but my mind was in an other dimension.

Well said. Any one that get more people reading is good, but branch out a little there Ms Oprah. My library once had a table of "Oprah Choices" and the books were all the same genre.

I certainly don't pick my books because they're Oprah's choice, but I've read some that happened to be and enjoyed them very much. Besides, I think it's wonderful that she's encouraging people to read.

Elizabeth

Amen to that.

Some activists have said they would love to have Oprah do a show on CFS, get the information out to the masses that there are some very real biological abnormalities, we're not "just depressed". And, yes, she could reach a huge audience, but another faction is concerned that she would only interview a miracle or two who've gotten back to work and leave people with the notion that those of us who have not been able to recover are still sick only because we don't have enough faith (and not because we were sicker to begin with or didn't get as good medical care).

Perhaps that was your library's fault. I would certainly not put _Night_, _Vinegar Hill_, _Daughter of Fortune_, and _The Book of Ruth_ in the same category with _Pillars of the Earth_ for example.

Elizabeth

I must admit I am not an Oprah devotee...mainly because I am doing other things when she is on. I greatly dislike TV, so it is OFF until the local news comes on at 5pm. Now DH, his TV burns up the wavelengths! He is a news, science and political junky!

I DO think that if Oprah is encouraging people to read and *think*, then something is accomplished. If they are blindly reading, not thinking, and parrotting her opinion, nothing is accomplished.

Gill

I was terribly grateful that she encouraged me to read 'Wild Swans' by Jung Chang. *What* an informative, emotionally wrenching read *that* was!

Yeah, I knew all that, Lucille!!I don't really think it was a major city, but he was indeed mayor.

However, could you have pride in putting on such circus?? I HAVE watched it; when we are in the boonies in the RV, it has occasinally shown up on the local network. Jim thinks it hilariously funny, I think it asinine! Different interpretations for different sexes, I guess; or is it gerentology gone wild??

Gill

No problem........the imagination boggles if he was runnning.....

Gillian

I don't agree. I have a lot of friends who taught in New York Public Schools and they all stated unequivocally that when they had a kid who wouldn't read, not the ones who had learning disabilities; rather those that just didn't like to read, they encouraged them to read anything that struck their fancy. They didn't care if they read comic books or cereal boxes. One reason is to get them proficient at reading skills and the other is the hope that something will click and they will want to read to learn.

Lucille