Disgusted With Oprah
From Erika

I watched Oprah's show yesterday. One of the topics was Terri. She briefly interviewed the parents and Terri's brother and sister.
I was sickened at how Oprah twisted the whole thing. She was definitely on the side of Terri's "thug" husband...that he should be allowed to kill her. The Schindler family conveyed to Oprah that they have known Terri a lot longer than her "husband" has known her...and that she had never expressed anything about dying or what she wanted to do in such a situation as currently exists. They said it was out of character for her to voice such a wish.
Oprah said very sarcasticly "REAAAALLLLY" ! It was very obvious that she wanted to discredit anything her parents said. Either Oprah was not briefed on all the facts, which are conveniently "overlooked" when discussing Terri, or Oprah is totally out of touch with reality.
Later on in the program, Oprah sat as 'judge and jury' degrading and insulting the woman whose son hanged himself in a closet because of bullying in school. Oprah sat there judging this woman very harshly, repeatedly calling her a liar, a misfit, obviously mentally ill because she was a bad housekeeper.
Why don't we just do away with courts and the trouble of presenting evidence, and have multi- millionaires like Oprah judge and sentence people on TV shows? Think how much money we can all save.
Disgusted with Oprah
From Daniel Gilliland
This is how our society maintains its boundaries. (I am not supporting this practice, simply pointing it out) We receive information at all levels and at all stages in life, which inform us of our "proper" places and methods of conduct. The news, the sitcoms, talkshows, little publications like "USA Weekend" all serve dual purposes: they of course inform or entertain or offer helpful household hints, but they also brutally enforce the boundaries which constitute, according to our particular society, "right thinking." Talkshows are particularly effective, because they often bring out controversial guests, or guests who reside on the fringe. Then they are attacked or supported or whatever needs to be done, in order that the home audience gets a very solid idea of just where the line is, and on which side a person should find himself. Fringe guests are mainly brought out to be ridiculed-- message: don't be like this person, don't be too daring, don't undermine what we're trying to do here. Controversial guests (those who are supported by 50% of the population, despised by the other half) are no less effective in constraining people's thought. You get people riled up about their point of view, and it creates an energy which is automatically opposed by the "other side." This creates an insurmountable impasse-- as in politics, or the abortion debate, or Israel vs. Arabs, etc etc-- and it is this actively-reinforced impasse which prevents people on either side from seeing that there is a higher-order of perception which would completely solve the problem at hand. But of course, probably neither side wants this, because a real solution to the problem would eliminate the condition which they use to maintain their identity. For example, if a solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict were found, you can be certain that it would involve the concomitant evaporation of the whole notion of "Jew vs. Arab." Even if this finally meant peace, many many people on either side would be reluctant to follow through, simply because they would lose the very thing which is defined and reinforced by continuing conflict.
Either way, people realize that if they cross certain lines, they can expect to be made pariahs and ridiculed to no end. Actually this doesn't happen much in real life, but we are made to fear the possibility. The show COPS on television is a classic example-- again, two messages: entertainment, and "don't commit crimes, or we WILL find you." Of course, police in real life are nowhere near so effective. The message is skewed toward the lower classes, acting as sort of a social pacifier. The more time the poor spending cheering on the cops who are arresting their friends and neighbors, and fearing for themselves (lest they too be caught), the less time they will have to look around and see that something is very wrong with society (and themselves) such that they continually experience this wretched condition.
All societies have ways of reinforcing their boundaries, so it's not terribly surprising to find that ours does, too. I think ours has just come a long way in terms of deploying certain technologies which take boundary-definition to a new level. In many ways the Internet is even better than television for this purpose, because people have a greater choice in terms of their information sources-- it is not suprising that people gravitate toward news sites which reflect their particular bias (polarization).
The funny thing is that a lot of the bigger news networks (MSNBC, CNN, etc) act more like Oprah than the overtly-biased news sources they are accused of being-- very often both the right and the left are complaining about the same media outlets! Oftentimes they do throw out objective pieces, from the point of view of the right/left polarity. This is a form of baiting which encourages people from both sides to energetically exhaust themselves by maintaining an "against" stance. It is precisely this form of baiting a stalemate which prevents people from stepping back and seeing that the entire conflict is a load of bollocks, and that it could be discarded entirely in favor of a more encompassing vision.
Unfortunately the alternative sites-- such as and rumormillnews, to name a few that I visit regularly-- are no less guilty in maintaining these unending escalations of perceptual blockage. While the mainstream media floats semi-objective pieces which can be equally frustrating for both sides of a particular spectrum, alternative sites tend to represent only a single viewpoint, aligned "against" the enemies of truth, or new world order oppressors, or what-have-you.
(I don't mean any offense by using Rense as an example-- even though I see most of these subjects in terms of polarities, I personally tend to lean toward the conspiratological left. Mea culpa!)
In summary, the New World Order will never be defeated, but neither will it win. The stalemate will end SOMEHOW, either with the cooperation of the people involved, or without it (more likely). The universe allows certain energy oppositions to exist for a time, but after a point, they are discarded and replaced with something else (transcended and reframed). This may be in our lifetimes or not.
Whatever the result is, it will be something that will make the efforts of both the Chomskys and the Kissingers utterly irrelevant. If you see a conflict which has been going on for years and years, and creating a lot of misery for everybody involved, dis-identify with either side and try to move beyond the argument entirely. Interesting perceptions await you.
or: When you can't move LATERALLY, move VERTICALLY.
From Name Wittheld
Jeff, it just dawned on me that there is something a lot more sinister going on here. Oprah was used as a tool to sway public opinion. A lot of people don't trust the system anymore. So they are starting to use celebrities with a large following to control public opinions. I think we will see a lot more of this.
Oprah's show, in retrospect, was out of character for her. As Oprah discredited and condemned these people, totally overlooking important facts which would have disproven her outrageous assertions, the camera showed close ups of the audience. The 'zombies' were totally in 'sinc' wit her, accepting the 'obvious' programming that was going on.

Alton Raines

No one should be surprised that Oprah supports the killing of Terri Schindler. Oprah is a ravenous pro-abortionist. Terri is not a human being to Oprah, she is an 'inviable tissue.' People like this can't recognize human life, they have isolated themselves from truth to such an extent that reality escapes their grasp. They have been given over to a depraved mind... "Whom God will destroy, he first makes mad."
John Smith
I agree with Alton Raines' comment.
But I read no comments addressing the real tragedy: Unless they were armed and gunning for bear, why would the Schindlers even appear on Oprah?
These Schindlers, and tragically their daughter Terri also, appear to me to be cannon fodder of the bleeding heart variety for the euthanasiasts. Which is why Felos and Greer are acting so boldly on behalf of Michael Schiavo. They know the Schindlers don't care enough about what is right or about each other to put up much of a fight. If it weren't for pro life activists getting involved, Terri Schiavo would only be getting a few crocodile tears on her ashes by now.




This Site Served by TheHostPros