...pation

https://tvline.com/2018/06/21/roseanne-spinoff-ordered-abc-sara-gilbert-darlene

“Roseanne Barr will have no financial or creative involvement in the new series,” ABC said in announcing its 10-episode straight-to-series order for The Conners spinoff, premiering this fall and starring Sara Gilbert, John Goodman, Laurie Metcalf, Lecy Goranson and Michael Fishman. Executive producer Tom Werner and showrunner Bruce Helford will also be back. ABC didn't announce how the spinoff would move forward without Roseanne Conner, but a description hinted that she might be killed off. “After a sudden turn of events, the Conners are forced to face the daily struggles of life in Lanford in a way they never have before," ABC said in its announcement. "This iconic family — Dan, Jackie, Darlene, Becky and D.J. — grapples with parenthood, dating, an unexpected pregnancy, financial pressures, aging and in-laws in working-class America. Through it all, the fights, the coupon cutting, the hand-me-downs, the breakdowns – with love, humor and perseverance, the family prevails.” ABC's announcement included a statement from Barr herself: “I regret the circumstances that have caused me to be removed from Roseanne," Barr said. "I agreed to the settlement in order that 200 jobs of beloved cast and crew could be saved, and I wish the best for everyone involved." ALSO: Roseanne Barr is expected to retain all rights to her Roseanne Conner character, including for future spinoffs or reboots beyond The Conners. (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/roseanne-spinoff-conners-officially-a-go-at-abc-1117397)

Best. News. Ever.

I hope they don't kill off Roseanne Conner. That would seem short-sighted in 2048, during the inevitable re-re-reunion.

This has disaster written all over it.

I smell a flop coming.

I hope they don't kill off Roseanne Conner. That would seem short-sighted in 2048, during the inevitable re-re-reunion.

Exactly. She will be back eventually because after so many years people forget about things.

I'm not a fan of this idea. They should just let it go.

Exactly. She will be back eventually because after so many years people forget about things.

They definitely do. Remember when Zsa Zsa Gabor slapped that cop? There was a huge backlash. And yet, she found plenty of work after that.

I'm not a fan of this idea. They should just let it go.

I will definitely watch. I liked the original show, I liked the return, and I will definitely give the spin-off a try.

I won't watch and will laugh when it's cancelled. That Sara Gilbert woman is a nasty piece of work. Stabbed Roseanne right between the shoulder blades.

If it weren't for Roseanne, she'd be slinging hash at the local IHOP.

I won't watch and will laugh when it's cancelled. That Sara Gilbert woman is a nasty piece of work. Stabbed Roseanne right between the shoulder blades.

She just said she didn't support racist comments. Anyone would have said this, as it's a no-brainer. You just don't call black people apes on social media. If you do, you won't have a job the next day.


If it weren't for Roseanne, she'd be slinging hash at the local IHOP.

Sara Gilbert is the sister of Melissa Gilbert, who was president of the Screen Actor's Guild for many years. They are Hollywood royalty, and there's no way Sara would be "slinging hash at IHOP" if she wanted work in Hollywood. :lol:

It's actually a lot more than that. Gilbert is the one who wanted to bring back Roseanne. This was HER little pet project. In fact, she had to convince Roseanne to get on board to do it. And when Roseanne made that tweet (whether it was right or wrong is irrelevant), Gilbert was the first one toi distance herself from Roseanne in order to protect her little reboot project.

She sided with ABC and threw Roseanne under the speeding bus with absolutely not one iota of regret. All to save her little reboot project that Roseanne didn't even want.

So now she's the main star and the exec producer of a show that was created by the person who MADE Gilbert what she is. IMO that's a backstabber. I won't argue this issue any more because it can go on and on so we can just disagree.


Sara Gilbert is the sister of Melissa Gilbert, who was president of the Screen Actor's Guild for many years. They are Hollywood royalty, and there's no way Sara would be "slinging hash at IHOP" if she wanted work in Hollywood. :lol:[/QUOTE]

The Gilberts are hardly Hollywood royalty. That made me laugh. Sara Gilbert is a very unlikable person and just exudes nastiness to me. Others may like her, but I find her acting, personality, and looks to be....well, i'll just be nice and say "distasteful".

Hope it fails spectacularly!

It's actually a lot more than that. Gilbert is the one who wanted to bring back Roseanne. This was HER little pet project. In fact, she had to convince Roseanne to get on board to do it. And when Roseanne made that tweet (whether it was right or wrong is irrelevant), Gilbert was the first one toi distance herself from Roseanne in order to protect her little reboot project.

She sided with ABC and threw Roseanne under the speeding bus with absolutely not one iota of regret. All to save her little reboot project that Roseanne didn't even want.

You think Roseanne "didn't want" to have the show rebooted? Roseanne Barr does not do anything she doesn't want to do. She said (https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=TprjfwhFK00) she was "having a blast", which is quite the opposite of a project she "didn't want" to do.


The Gilberts are hardly Hollywood royalty. That made me laugh.

You think the president of the most powerful organization in Hollywood isn't Hollywood royalty? Well, okay.

It's actually a lot more than that. Gilbert is the one who wanted to bring back Roseanne. This was HER little pet project. In fact, she had to convince Roseanne to get on board to do it. And when Roseanne made that tweet (whether it was right or wrong is irrelevant), Gilbert was the first one toi distance herself from Roseanne in order to protect her little reboot project.

She sided with ABC and threw Roseanne under the speeding bus with absolutely not one iota of regret. All to save her little reboot project that Roseanne didn't even want.

So now she's the main star and the exec producer of a show that was created by the person who MADE Gilbert what she is. IMO that's a backstabber. I won't argue this issue any more because it can go on and on so we can just disagree.


Sara Gilbert is the sister of Melissa Gilbert, who was president of the Screen Actor's Guild for many years. They are Hollywood royalty, and there's no way Sara would be "slinging hash at IHOP" if she wanted work in Hollywood. :lol:

The Gilberts are hardly Hollywood royalty. That made me laugh. Sara Gilbert is a very unlikable person and just exudes nastiness to me. Others may like her, but I find her acting, personality, and looks to be....well, i'll just be nice and say "distasteful".

Hope it fails spectacularly!

Are you serious? Roseanne threw herself into that bus with that racist tweet.

Just because Sara distanced herself from a racist tweet, that somehow makes her a backstabber? Yeah, she's gonna give up her dignity, her values and stand behind a comment that is totally repulsive. Makes total sense. :rolleyes: Just because someone helped your career doesn't mean you need to stand by them 100%. Trust and respect are not unconditional.

Also, get your facts straight. They were BOTH exec producers on the reboot, and Roseanne shared co-creator credit on the original show. There's no way she stole the show away from her. Roseanne even agreed to give up the show so people's jobs could be created.

Terrible arguments all around.

One thing about it if they Kill Roseanne off it can be explained as a part of a book that Dan was writing. Just about how they brought him back. The show should have stayed in the 90's. It's getting ridiculous now.

Are you serious? Roseanne threw herself into that bus with that racist tweet.

Exactly. Nobody forced Roseanne to write that racist tweet. Not even the Ambien. :crazy:


Just because Sara distanced herself from a racist tweet, that somehow makes her a backstabber? Yeah, she's gonna give up her dignity, her values and stand behind a comment that is totally repulsive. Makes total sense. :rolleyes: Just because someone helped your career doesn't mean you need to stand by them 100%. Trust and respect are not unconditional.

Well said. I'd only add that Roseanne was hardly the only person who helped Sara's career get off the ground: the casting director, the writers, and the producers all share some credit for that. (And if Marcy Carsey suddenly went on some crazy online rant, you better believe everyone would distance themselves from her crazy statements).


Also, get your facts straight. They were BOTH exec producers on the reboot, and Roseanne shared co-creator credit on the original show. There's no way she stole the show away from her. Roseanne even agreed to give up the show so people's jobs could be created.


Yep. Roseanne knows what she did was over the line, and I'm glad she's stepping back so the damage can be mitigated. The only person here who did anything wrong was the person who called a black person an "ape" on Twitter, in front of millions of people: it was an unprovoked attack, cowardly and dumb, and Roseanne rightly lost her job because of it.

There's no way she stole the show away from her.

That's EXACTLY what Gilbert did. She stole her show from under her. And Roseanne gave in and gave up her rights to the show not just to "save 200 jobs", but because she knew darn well she couldn't go up against the current fascist/liberal/Hollywood/Groupthink/PC brigade.

The current political atmosphere is so disgusting from BOTH sides, but it's one particular side that if you anger them, you're done forever. It's like 1939 Germany!

And a horrifying tweet by a Hollywood actor calling for a child to be placed in a cage with pedophiles to be raped doesn't garner any outrage simply because the words came from a liberal towards a conservative.

Roseanne calls someone an "ape" and loses everything. Give me a break. I just hope Roseanne gets the last laugh when all is said and done.

Edited to add: Roseanne certainly DID have reservations about coming back for a reboot. She initially DIDN'T want to do it and thought it was a bad idea. It was GILBERT who pressured her to do it. I wouldn't be surprised if she had this planned all along. Snake.

One thing about it if they Kill Roseanne off it can be explained as a part of a book that Dan was writing. Just about how they brought him back. The show should have stayed in the 90's. It's getting ridiculous now.

Absolutely agree.

There's no way she stole the show away from her.

That's EXACTLY what Gilbert did. She stole her show from under her. And Roseanne gave in and gave up her rights to the show not just to "save 200 jobs", but because she knew darn well she couldn't go up against the current fascist/liberal/Hollywood/Groupthink/PC brigade.

The current political atmosphere is so disgusting from BOTH sides, but it's one particular side that if you anger them, you're done forever. It's like 1939 Germany!

No, in 1939 Germany, the people who wrote that other races were sub-human apes were the ones who rose to power. That's why we condemn that now: society now recognizes that when you strip away people's humanity, you can treat them like nothing, because you believe they are no longer human. This has nothing to do with the "current fascist/liberal/Hollywood/Groupthink/PC brigade", as you claim: this was a decision that was made by American society in the mid-1940s when the mass murder of millions of "sub-humans" by the Axis Powers came to light. We just don't call black people "apes" anymore, or "jungle bunnies" or "******s". This isn't "PC-ness", it's called human decency. Roseanne wasn't decent, and she lost her job; not because of a totalitarian government, and not because of someone else on the show, but because American society now rejects calling black people "apes", and because everyone on the planet could see exactly what she wrote.


And a horrifying tweet by a Hollywood actor calling for a child to be placed in a cage with pedophiles to be raped doesn't garner any outrage simply because the words came from a liberal towards a conservative.

No, there's plenty of outrage about Peter Fonda's disgusting tweet, and the Secret Service has been notified. They will put him through hell, if Kathy Griffin's account of what happened to her is any indication. The thing is, though... that's actually the government doing that. That's actually closer to 1939 Germany than ABC firing Roseanne.


It was GILBERT who pressured her to do it. I wouldn't be surprised if she had this planned all along. Snake.

Sure, Sara Gilbert planned for Roseanne to make a racist tweet... She probably slipped that Ambien into her drink just hours before Roseanne sent out the racist tweet, knowing it would doom her career. Patiently, she waited 30 years, ready to betray Roseanne at the first opportunity... :lol:

Except we all know she remained loyal to Roseanne for 30 years.

I won't watch and will laugh when it's cancelled. That Sara Gilbert woman is a nasty piece of work. Stabbed Roseanne right between the shoulder blades.

If it weren't for Roseanne, she'd be slinging hash at the local IHOP.

What the heck?

No, in 1939 Germany, the people who wrote that other races were sub-human apes were the ones who rose to power. That's why we condemn that now: society now recognizes that when you strip away people's humanity, you can treat them like nothing, because you believe they are no longer human. This has nothing to do with the "current fascist/liberal/Hollywood/Groupthink/PC brigade", as you claim: this was a decision that was made by American society in the mid-1940s when the mass murder of millions of "sub-humans" by the Axis Powers came to light. We just don't call black people "apes" anymore, or "jungle bunnies" or "******s". This isn't "PC-ness", it's called human decency. Roseanne wasn't decent, and she lost her job; not because of a totalitarian government, and not because of someone else on the show, but because American society now rejects calling black people "apes", and because everyone on the planet could see exactly what she wrote.




No, there's plenty of outrage about Peter Fonda's disgusting tweet, and the Secret Service has been notified. They will put him through hell, if Kathy Griffin's account of what happened to her is any indication. The thing is, though... that's actually the government doing that. That's actually closer to 1939 Germany than ABC firing Roseanne.



Sure, Sara Gilbert planned for Roseanne to make a racist tweet... She probably slipped that Ambien into her drink just hours before Roseanne sent out the racist tweet, knowing it would doom her career. Patiently, she waited 30 years, ready to betray Roseanne at the first opportunity... :lol:

Except we all know she remained loyal to Roseanne for 30 years.


You're obviously a liberal and since there's no reasoning with one i'm not continuing this conversation with you. We disagree and let's leave it at that.

If this show succeeds without Roseanne, (which I highly doubt) then more power to them. I'm sure Roseanne got a very nice payout from ABC anyway to give up the rights to her creation and at her age, she can now very comfortably retire.

I take comfort knowing Sara Gilbert is being widely hated on so many message boards on the subject. MANY see exactly what she did and won't be tuning in either.

Many MORE are standing behind Roseanne than against her. :clap:

Roseanne spinoff The Conners draws a mixed response (https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/22/entertainment/roseanne-barr-the-connors-react/index.html)
Some were happy the cast and crew would be able to continue working, while others said the show wouldn't succeed without its star. These Roseanne Barr supporters used the hashtag #StandWithRoseanne.

Roseanne spinoff The Conners could be successful, but only if Roseanne Conner is killed off (http://www.vulture.com/2018/06/roseanne-spinoff-imagining-the-conners.html)

ABC's The Conners announcement seemed to hint that Roseanne Barr's character would die, which should absolutely happen, says Kathryn VanArendonk. "If The Conners is going to be Roseanne without Roseanne but the character doesn’t die, the show will quickly tilt toward the same self-loathing, ironicized mess of the original Roseanne’s ninth season," says VanArendonk. "It wouldn’t be a show about a working-class family; it’d be a show about the strangeness of its own existence. Plus, anything less than Roseanne’s death leaves the door open for her return, which would be a remarkably craven gesture." VanArendonk offers several reasons why The Conners could work, including that Barr had been holding the show back because her acting ability in the revival paled in comparison to her co-stars. "In addition to the consequences of her cruel, racist, and harmfully conspiratorial Twitter feed, Barr also offered much less natural acting in the revival than she had in the original series," says VanArendonk. "While (John) Goodman, (Sara) Gilbert, (Laurie) Metcalf, and the rest of the cast hit their beats and made the show’s rhythm their own, Barr often seemed to be reading from cue cards. What once came off as a refreshingly, bracingly direct style on the original series did not translate well into the revival, where Barr seemed less concerned about being within the story and more obviously concerned about performing the story. I’m curious what The Conners could look like without that stilted performance element."

ALSO:

How The Conners should proceed: Keep it real and quit doing episodes on politics and social hot buttons (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/22/arts/television/roseanne-the-conners-abc.html)
No matter what The Conners does to Roseanne Conner, it will still be haunted by Roseanne Barr (https://variety.com/2018/tv/news/roseanne-spinoff-conners-roseanne-barr-1202855014/)
Former Roseanne crew members greeted with a welcome back message (http://www.tmz.com/2018/06/22/roseanne-crew-welcome-back-conners-reboot/)

I won't watch and will laugh when it's cancelled. That Sara Gilbert woman is a nasty piece of work. Stabbed Roseanne right between the shoulder blades.

If it weren't for Roseanne, she'd be slinging hash at the local IHOP.

A total lie.

She'd be slinging hash at the local IHOB

There's no way she stole the show away from her.

That's EXACTLY what Gilbert did. She stole her show from under her. And Roseanne gave in and gave up her rights to the show not just to "save 200 jobs", but because she knew darn well she couldn't go up against the current fascist/liberal/Hollywood/Groupthink/PC brigade.

The current political atmosphere is so disgusting from BOTH sides, but it's one particular side that if you anger them, you're done forever. It's like 1939 Germany!

And a horrifying tweet by a Hollywood actor calling for a child to be placed in a cage with pedophiles to be raped doesn't garner any outrage simply because the words came from a liberal towards a conservative.

Roseanne calls someone an "ape" and loses everything. Give me a break. I just hope Roseanne gets the last laugh when all is said and done.

Edited to add: Roseanne certainly DID have reservations about coming back for a reboot. She initially DIDN'T want to do it and thought it was a bad idea. It was GILBERT who pressured her to do it. I wouldn't be surprised if she had this planned all along. Snake.

Nobody was "forcing" her to sign onto the show and nobody "forced" her to give up the show, she consented to both. Do you ever think that the reason she handed over the show because her heart wasn't in it? How can someone be "forced" out of something that their heart wasn't into in the first place? Kinda conflicted your own arguments there. Your comment about Sara sabotaging Roseanne with that tweet is just ridiculous and laughable :lol:

The 1939 Germany comment is the exact opposite of what happened with this situation. In 1939 Germany, you were vilified if you weren't racist, in 2018 USA, you're vilified if you are racist. Also, you're comparing what happened on a public level (1930's Germany government) versus a private company (2018 Disney/ABC), so this has nothing to do with politics, but has everything to do with political incorrectness, which ABC rightly called out.

Political incorrectness is wrong on both sides so saying "what about this?" doesn't strengthen your argument about liberals being the "bad" guys, because this stuff happens on both sides of the aisles. There would have been consequences out if a liberal tweeted it too. What ABC did was unprecedented so you can't go back in time and say, "well, what about this?"

I also don't know where you get the idea that Sara is "evil," she has been nothing but diplomatic during this whole controversy. I think your hate for her is based on the fact that you're upset because she didn't defend Roseanne and that she's a liberal.

Nobody was "forcing" her to sign onto the show and nobody "forced" her to give up the show, she consented to both. Do you ever think that the reason she handed over the show because her heart wasn't in it? How can someone be "forced" out of something that their heart wasn't into in the first place? Kinda conflicted your own arguments there. Your comment about Sara sabotaging Roseanne with that tweet is just ridiculous and laughable :lol:

The 1939 Germany comment is the exact opposite of what happened with this situation. In 1939 Germany, you were vilified if you weren't racist, in 2018 USA, you're vilified if you are racist. Also, you're comparing what happened on a public level (1930's Germany government) versus a private company (2018 Disney/ABC), so this has nothing to do with politics, but has everything to do with political incorrectness, which ABC rightly called out.

Political incorrectness is wrong on both sides so saying "what about this?" doesn't strengthen your argument about liberals being the "bad" guys, because this stuff happens on both sides of the aisles. There would have been consequences out if a liberal tweeted it too. What ABC did was unprecedented so you can't go back in time and say, "well, what about this?"

I also don't know where you get the idea that Sara is "evil," she has been nothing but diplomatic during this whole controversy. I think your hate for her is based on the fact that you're upset because she didn't defend Roseanne and that she's a liberal.

There are no consequences when liberals do the same thing. Hence my 1939 reference. It's 1939 in reverse if you want to call it that, with one side controlling things and crushing anyone who dares to defy them.

It would be nice if BOTH sides would come together but the liberal side refuses to budge on anything. It's their way or no way. That's a fascist way to be. Just look at the disgusting things being said all over social media by liberals.

The latest is Roseanne's ex Tom Arnold wanting to go to the President's son's school to harass him!! If a conservative said that about the previous administration's child, Secret Service would have him detained already. It's so out of control.

And all one has to do is do a search on the president of ABC to see her picture and know where Roseanne's firing really came from. It was racism right back at her for that tweet.

Rather than starting a conversation and using the opportunity to heal, this president chose to further divide and instead use it as a "teaching lesson".

There's a lot being said there....if you anger or offend the PC brigade....you will be taught a lesson. If you don't find that scary, then I feel sorry for you.

And as far as Sara Gilbert is concerned, I find her despicable and it just exudes off her on television. Like her all you want...I don't have to.

Roseanne spinoff The Conners draws a mixed response (https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/22/entertainment/roseanne-barr-the-connors-react/index.html)
Some were happy the cast and crew would be able to continue working, while others said the show wouldn't succeed without its star. These Roseanne Barr supporters used the hashtag #StandWithRoseanne.

Roseanne spinoff The Conners could be successful, but only if Roseanne Conner is killed off (http://www.vulture.com/2018/06/roseanne-spinoff-imagining-the-conners.html)

ABC's The Conners announcement seemed to hint that Roseanne Barr's character would die, which should absolutely happen, says Kathryn VanArendonk. "If The Conners is going to be Roseanne without Roseanne but the character doesn’t die, the show will quickly tilt toward the same self-loathing, ironicized mess of the original Roseanne’s ninth season," says VanArendonk. "It wouldn’t be a show about a working-class family; it’d be a show about the strangeness of its own existence. Plus, anything less than Roseanne’s death leaves the door open for her return, which would be a remarkably craven gesture." VanArendonk offers several reasons why The Conners could work, including that Barr had been holding the show back because her acting ability in the revival paled in comparison to her co-stars. "In addition to the consequences of her cruel, racist, and harmfully conspiratorial Twitter feed, Barr also offered much less natural acting in the revival than she had in the original series," says VanArendonk. "While (John) Goodman, (Sara) Gilbert, (Laurie) Metcalf, and the rest of the cast hit their beats and made the show’s rhythm their own, Barr often seemed to be reading from cue cards. What once came off as a refreshingly, bracingly direct style on the original series did not translate well into the revival, where Barr seemed less concerned about being within the story and more obviously concerned about performing the story. I’m curious what The Conners could look like without that stilted performance element."

ALSO:

How The Conners should proceed: Keep it real and quit doing episodes on politics and social hot buttons (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/22/arts/television/roseanne-the-conners-abc.html)
No matter what The Conners does to Roseanne Conner, it will still be haunted by Roseanne Barr (https://variety.com/2018/tv/news/roseanne-spinoff-conners-roseanne-barr-1202855014/)
Former Roseanne crew members greeted with a welcome back message (http://www.tmz.com/2018/06/22/roseanne-crew-welcome-back-conners-reboot/)
Roseanne's going to be haunting this show regardless. The only show that succeeded in killing off a lead character was the Hogan Family and nobody had over 20 years invested in that character. And really what are they going to do? They can either dwell on her death or gloss over it like what happened on Kevin Can Wait . Either way I don't think it's going to satisfy a lot of people.

You're obviously a liberal and since there's no reasoning with one i'm not continuing this conversation with you.

Actually, I'm a registered Libertarian. I have voted Third Party in every election, starting in 1992. Neither party represents me or any of the values I hold dear.


I take comfort knowing Sara Gilbert is being widely hated on so many message boards on the subject. MANY see exactly what she did and won't be tuning in either.

Many MORE are standing behind Roseanne than against her. :clap:
What's your source for the numbers?

They should not mention Roseanne in the new show. Pretend like she never existed.

There are no consequences when liberals do the same thing. Hence my 1939 reference. It's 1939 in reverse if you want to call it that, with one side controlling things and crushing anyone who dares to defy them.

It would be nice if BOTH sides would come together but the liberal side refuses to budge on anything. It's their way or no way. That's a fascist way to be. Just look at the disgusting things being said all over social media by liberals.

While I'll agree that there have been instances where liberals have said something racist and got away Scot free, (i.e. Kelly Osbourne's comment about latinos on The View, Giuliana Rancic's patchouli and weed comment on Fashion Police, and Bill Maher's N-word use on his show), there's no way the mass media is fascist, because it's not controlled by the government. If anything, this government is starting to become fascist with Trump as president, declaring something as "fake news," his rampant corruption and sexism, and declaring the 2016 fraudulent election as a "scam." The only thing he doesn't have control of is the mass media, but he's trying to do that by creating his own TV network.

The latest is Roseanne's ex Tom Arnold wanting to go to the President's son's school to harass him!! If a conservative said that about the previous administration's child, Secret Service would have him detained already. It's so out of control.

What does this have to do with Tom Arnold? Your example is totally irrelevant. There's nothing biased about what the media has done or said about him. There's absolutely no comparison to Roseanne's racist remarks. That example is on a completely whole different level. There is no media bias here.

And all one has to do is do a search on the president of ABC to see her picture and know where Roseanne's firing really came from. It was racism right back at her for that tweet.

I think you're trying to say that the media is biased, which yes, it is, but it's not racism to declare something as racist. Stop trying to skew something as racist when it's not.

Rather than starting a conversation and using the opportunity to heal, this president chose to further divide and instead use it as a "teaching lesson".

The president didn't even deny or confirm that Roseanne's racist, which truly was despicable, instead he made it ALL about him. He failed terribly, comparing things that ABC said about him, which weren't even racist.

If anything, he wasn't further dividing, he was opening the discussion that things in the media are biased, which is true, but his execution was all around poor.

There's a lot being said there....if you anger or offend the PC brigade....you will be taught a lesson. If you don't find that scary, then I feel sorry for you.

It's not about teaching a lesson, it's simply that racism isn't tolerated, period. What's scary is that people, like you, who justify racism as media bias, draw up media bias examples that having nothing to do with racism, declare racism where there is no racism, point out media bias where none exists, and fail to see that racism behavior is unacceptable and that it requires consequences, regardless of political party.

And as far as Sara Gilbert is concerned, I find her despicable and it just exudes off her on television. Like her all you want...I don't have to.

We get it, you don't like her because she's a liberal. Nobody is asking you to like her.

They should not mention Roseanne in the new show. Pretend like she never existed.

I disagree. I think they should have her off-screen, recovering from surgery for the first five episodes, and then visiting with relatives in Moline for the next five episodes. This will keep their options open for future years. What they shouldn't do is kill off the character, as that will limit them in years down the line. History has shown that the public is soon to forgive, given some time.

I disagree. I think they should have her off-screen, recovering from surgery for the first five episodes, and then visiting with relatives in Moline for the next five episodes. This will keep their options open for future years. What they shouldn't do is kill off the character, as that will limit them in years down the line. History has shown that the public is soon to forgive, given some time.

Yeah, it would be a huge disservice to fans, if they didn't mention what's going to happen to Roseanne in the spin-off.

I don't think they're going to kill her off because that would anger a lot of people (and Roseanne herself wouldn't approve) but I think they will mention that she moved away/tried to cross the border illegally or got incarcerated for Ambien abuse and that's why we can't see her.

Yeah, it would be a huge disservice to fans, if they didn't mention what's going to happen to Roseanne in the spin-off.

I don't think they're going to kill her off because that would anger a lot of people (and Roseanne herself wouldn't approve) but I think they will mention that she moved away/tried to cross the border illegally or got incarcerated for Ambien abuse and that's why we can't see her.

Ambien abuse :lol:

Killing her off would be terrible; as bad as when they did that to the wife on Kevin Can Wait.

Killing her off would be joy.

While I'll agree that there have been instances where liberals have said something racist and got away Scot free, (i.e. Kelly Osbourne's comment about latinos on The View, Giuliana Rancic's patchouli and weed comment on Fashion Police, and Bill Maher's N-word use on his show), there's no way the mass media is fascist, because it's not controlled by the government. If anything, this government is starting to become fascist with Trump as president, declaring something as "fake news," his rampant corruption and sexism, and declaring the 2016 fraudulent election as a "scam." The only thing he doesn't have control of is the mass media, but he's trying to do that by creating his own TV network.



What does this have to do with Tom Arnold? Your example is totally irrelevant. There's nothing biased about what the media has done or said about him. There's absolutely no comparison to Roseanne's racist remarks. That example is on a completely whole different level. There is no media bias here.

I brought up the Tom Arnold tweet as an example of the blatant hypocrisy of liberals. When a conservative tweets something offensive, they get vilified, and in Roseanne's case, lose their entire career.
Tom Arnold tweets to harass the President's underage son at his school and nothing happens to him. Peter Fonda tweets to lock the same kid into a cage to be raped by pedophiles and there's no liberal outrage. Why?! Is it not disgusting, horrifying and offensive when directed towards a conservative person?!
And it certainly IS relevant because this shows clearly the hypocrisy of the left in regard to Roseanne's tweet....which by the way was NOT racist. Saying you hate black people is racist. Saying black people are all bad people is racist.

What Roseanne tweeted was a joke and the only racism in it was what was viewed by racist people. Go to You Tube and you'll even see black people saying the same thing.





I think you're trying to say that the media is biased, which yes, it is, but it's not racism to declare something as racist. Stop trying to skew something as racist when it's not.

Again, Roseanne is not "racist". Declaring someone as racist when they're clearly not is wrong. There have been hundreds of times where black comedians make jokes at white people's expense...yet they're automatically labeled "racist". Why? Don't you find that questionable?


The president didn't even deny or confirm that Roseanne's racist, which truly was despicable, instead he made it ALL about him. He failed terribly, comparing things that ABC said about him, which weren't even racist.

If anything, he wasn't further dividing, he was opening the discussion that things in the media are biased, which is true, but his execution was all around poor.

I need to clarify that comment above. I was referring to the ABC president, not Trump. The president of ABC, a black woman took immediate personal offense to the joke and destroyed Roseanne.
She could have treated the incident much differently than she did. Opened a conversation with Roseanne and others. But rather than have a conversation and lessen the divide, she simply opened that divided chasm even further with instant firing. No if's ands or buts. It's the liberal way. Oh so tolerant they are right?

It's not about teaching a lesson, it's simply that racism isn't tolerated, period. What's scary is that people, like you, who justify racism as media bias, draw up media bias examples that having nothing to do with racism, declare racism where there is no racism, point out media bias where none exists, and fail to see that racism behavior is unacceptable and that it requires consequences, regardless of political party.

If racism weren't tolerated, then there would be consequences when those of color make offensive remarks towards those who are not. But that doesn't happen because in those cases, it's acceptable.

And there is so much media bias out there it's sickening. The entire MSM has become nothing but a liberal propaganda machine. Look at the current Time Magazine cover to see your media bias and photoshopped fake news.


We get it, you don't like her because she's a liberal. Nobody is asking you to like her.

I don't like her because she's a snake.

Ambien abuse :lol:

Killing her off would be terrible; as bad as when they did that to the wife on Kevin Can Wait.

10 ways The Conners could write off Roseanne Barr's character (https://tvline.com/2018/06/23/roseanne-dies-the-conners-spinoff-leaving-exit-explained/)
Here are some suggestions for handling a post-Roseanne Barr Roseanne spinoff, including: "Season 10 was Dan’s Ambien-infused dream." ALSO: Judd Apatow says Roseanne may be "crying out for help." (http://www.indiewire.com/2018/06/judd-apatow-roseanne-barr-crying-out-for-help-1201978057/)

I don't like her because she's a snake.

I said it in another thread, if Roseanne would have said the same thing against an African American Conservative an apology would have been enough if that. If she wasn't a Trump supporter and acted like she did back in the 90's nothing would have been said. I didn't like her tweet but the hypocrisy of ABC is just too much.

10 ways The Conners could write off Roseanne Barr's character (https://tvline.com/2018/06/23/roseanne-dies-the-conners-spinoff-leaving-exit-explained/)
Here are some suggestions for handling a post-Roseanne Barr Roseanne spinoff, including: "Season 10 was Dan’s Ambien-infused dream."

Some of these are funny, but would be a major betrayal to the show and the character. #9, the Kevin James Solution, is hilarious, but I sure hope it doesn't happen. #6, the Chuck Cunningham Solution, is not how I'd choose to write off any character.

I'd just write her off the way Three's Company wrote Chrissy off. Have her go visit her sick mother. lol

I'd just write her off the way Three's Company wrote Chrissy off. Have her go visit her sick mother. lol

Would she have to phone in every few episodes? :lol:

I said it in another thread, if Roseanne would have said the same thing against an African American Conservative an apology would have been enough if that. If she wasn't a Trump supporter and acted like she did back in the 90's nothing would have been said. I didn't like her tweet but the hypocrisy of ABC is just too much.

Bingo.

And it's not just ABC, it's the entire left, MSM, Hollywood. They're being more and more blatant and in your face about their hypocrisy, as if they're purposely challenging the other side to call them out because they know there won't be consequences for them. But there will be hell to pay if you're a conservative and offend. Their masks are coming off and they don't care.

Samantha Bee, Tom Arnold, Peter Fonda...all spewed out much more disgusting and offensive tweets after Roseanne's without any consequence.

Bingo.

And it's not just ABC, it's the entire left, MSM, Hollywood. They're being more and more blatant and in your face about their hypocrisy, as if they're purposely challenging the other side to call them out because they know there won't be consequences for them. But there will be hell to pay if you're a conservative and offend. Their masks are coming off and they don't care.

Samantha Bee, Tom Arnold, Peter Fonda...all spewed out much more disgusting and offensive tweets after Roseanne's without any consequence.
Frankly I just don't watch many current shows anymore. I just don't like many people out in current Hollywood. My TV broke a month ago and I haven't really missed it. I'll get a new one before football season though. I usually just watch the classics and old time movies. I used to live for the new fall TV season but now it just comes and go. They don't really care about me anyway since I'm over 49.In fact I didn't even know about Roseanne being canceled or her tweet until I read it here. lol

Frankly I just don't watch many current shows anymore. I just don't like many people out in current Hollywood. My TV broke a month ago and I haven't really missed it. I'll get a new one before football season though. I usually just watch the classics and old time movies. I used to live for the new fall TV season but now it just comes and go. They don't really care about me anyway since I'm over 49.In fact I didn't even know about Roseanne being canceled or her tweet until I read it here. lol

So how do you watch TV?

So how do you watch TV?
I haven't watched any TV in a month.

Frankly I just don't watch many current shows anymore. I just don't like many people out in current Hollywood. My TV broke a month ago and I haven't really missed it. I'll get a new one before football season though. I usually just watch the classics and old time movies. I used to live for the new fall TV season but now it just comes and go. They don't really care about me anyway since I'm over 49.In fact I didn't even know about Roseanne being canceled or her tweet until I read it here. lol

The only TV in my house is 10 years old and when that breaks down i'm seriously thinking of not replacing it. I use a $5.00 pair of rabbit ear antenna for over the air channels and keep it continuously locked on classic channels like AntennaTV & GetTV.

I'd rather watch those great 20th century classic shows over and over daily than any of the modern crap airing the networks today. And lots of these old shows are free on You Tube so when the TV conks out, that's probably it for me.

I'm in the same age range as you and you're correct...they don't care about us anyway.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/judd-apatow-believes-that-roseanne-is-crying-out-for-help/ar-AAz48cF?ocid=spartanntp

I haven't watched any TV in a month.

You don't watch TV anymore then and I'm assuming you cut the cord.

You don't watch TV anymore then and I'm assuming you cut the cord.

He stated that his TV broke.

You don't watch TV anymore then and I'm assuming you cut the cord.
I'll get a new one by football season. I also need it to be able to watch Me-TV and Antenna TV. That's what I usually watch in primetime. I DVR the shows and watch them once a week in primetime like I used to do when I was a kid.

He stated that his TV broke.

Oh okay then.

I disagree. I think they should have her off-screen, recovering from surgery for the first five episodes, and then visiting with relatives in Moline for the next five episodes. This will keep their options open for future years. What they shouldn't do is kill off the character, as that will limit them in years down the line. History has shown that the public is soon to forgive, given some time.

I was just joking.

I never watched the original Roseanne show, not did I watch the revival.

I brought up the Tom Arnold tweet as an example of the blatant hypocrisy of liberals. When a conservative tweets something offensive, they get vilified, and in Roseanne's case, lose their entire career.
Tom Arnold tweets to harass the President's underage son at his school and nothing happens to him. Peter Fonda tweets to lock the same kid into a cage to be raped by pedophiles and there's no liberal outrage. Why?! Is it not disgusting, horrifying and offensive when directed towards a conservative person?!

Yes, Sony should have blocked the film and yes, Tom Arnold should have consequences for his actions, but are you seriously comparing pedophilia and racism? That's like comparing apples to oranges. Yes, they're examples of media bias but that doesn't mean they're comparable, which is why I said these references are irrelevant to Roseanne's racist tweet.

And it certainly IS relevant because this shows clearly the hypocrisy of the left in regard to Roseanne's tweet....which by the way was NOT racist. Saying you hate black people is racist. Saying black people are all bad people is racist.

What Roseanne tweeted was a joke and the only racism in it was what was viewed by racist people. Go to You Tube and you'll even see black people saying the same thing.

Again, Roseanne is not "racist". Declaring someone as racist when they're clearly not is wrong. There have been hundreds of times where black comedians make jokes at white people's expense...yet they're automatically labeled "racist". Why? Don't you find that questionable?


There's more to racism than just saying you hate a race or saying one race is bad. How close minded. Of course, the ape comment was racist. There's a long history of using that word to dehumanize and to demean black people. The only people that don't seen it as racist, are racists. Also, it wasn't even a joke. There was nothing funny about it. It was blatantly racist and Roseanne is a racist for saying it, as hard as that is to accept. I view it as racist, and that somehow makes me racist? :rolleyes: OK, yeah, that makes total sense. Just because black people are saying it's not racist, doesn't make it racist. Roseanne still can't accept that the comment is not a joke.

All forms of racism are bad, even when black people make "jokes" about white people, but still, bringing that argument in doesn't justify why Roseanne's tweet should have been tolerated.


I need to clarify that comment above. I was referring to the ABC president, not Trump. The president of ABC, a black woman took immediate personal offense to the joke and destroyed Roseanne.
She could have treated the incident much differently than she did. Opened a conversation with Roseanne and others. But rather than have a conversation and lessen the divide, she simply opened that divided chasm even further with instant firing. No if's ands or buts. It's the liberal way. Oh so tolerant they are right?


It wasn't just the ABC president who took offense, it outraged a lot of people. The ABC network doesn't tolerate ANY racism of any kind, which is why they fired her from the network. If they took time to consider the implications that were said, the ABC network would be in hot water because they would be condoning her behavior, and financing someone who is clearly racist while working and representing them.


If racism weren't tolerated, then there would be consequences when those of color make offensive remarks towards those who are not. But that doesn't happen because in those cases, it's acceptable.

All forms of racism are unacceptable. Just because no action is taken about something racist being said, doesn't make it acceptable.

And there is so much media bias out there it's sickening. The entire MSM has become nothing but a liberal propaganda machine. Look at the current Time Magazine cover to see your media bias and photoshopped fake news.

Time magazine may be left-leaning, but the cover is not "fake news," it's political commentary. There's a huge difference.

I loved the revival, and as you can see by my avatar, Darlene is my favorite character ever, fabulously portraied by Gilbert.

But I will not watch it. Roseanne made an awful tweet, but I'm not inclined to crucify people for one mistake: she has an over 20 years career showing she isn't racist at all, and she's one of the very few people that in the past introduced to the mainstream audience all the themes that are so deear to the people that are lynching her now.

And I'm really disappointed by the cast. Not even a half word for her.
Taking her show and doing it without her is really low and mean.

They definitely do. Remember when Zsa Zsa Gabor slapped that cop? There was a huge backlash. And yet, she found plenty of work after that.



I will definitely watch. I liked the original show, I liked the return, and I will definitely give the spin-off a try.
Yes ZsaZsa did. One part was in the Beverly Hillbillies movie. She was the woman in the police lineup who was involved in a drive by slapping

I won't be watching it. Especially if that Sara Gilbert is in it. Johnny Carson used to make fun of political figures all the time and got away with it. It was wrong even when he did it. Roseanne messed up, she admitted it and said she was sorry. But not good enough for Sara Gilbert whom Roseanne mentored.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/roseanne-barr-talks-abc-firing-in-emotional-interview-e2-80-98i-definitely-feel-remorse-e2-80-99/ar-AAz67Rk

Yes ZsaZsa did. One part was in the Beverly Hillbillies movie. She was the woman in the police lineup who was involved in a drive by slapping

LOL, I remember that scene!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/roseanne-barr-talks-abc-firing-in-emotional-interview-e2-80-98i-definitely-feel-remorse-e2-80-99/ar-AAz67Rk

I'm glad she feels remorse, and I'm glad she's starting to take some ownership of what she said, but she needs to completely get off Twitter. She's proven repeatedly she doesn't know how to use the platform responsibly.

I'm glad she feels remorse, and I'm glad she's starting to take some ownership of what she said, but she needs to completely get off Twitter. She's proven repeatedly she doesn't know how to use the platform responsibly.

I second that!

I'm glad she feels remorse, and I'm glad she's starting to take some ownership of what she said, but she needs to completely get off Twitter. She's proven repeatedly she doesn't know how to use the platform responsibly.
I think a lot of celebrities need to get off twitter. That goes for some sports stars too. I never saw the appeal of it. All it does is get you in trouble.

I think a lot of celebrities need to get off twitter. That goes for some sports stars too. I never saw the appeal of it. All it does is get you in trouble.

I absolutely agree. Many people do not understand the power of their words when they are famous.

I absolutely agree. Many people do not understand the power of their words when they are famous.

^ I second that!

Yes, she made a mistake and apologized for it, but I think her firing was a huge wake up call for her, and it was needed to done, in order that she complete a 180 in her behavior, in order to understand that hateful words are not acceptable. Hopefully this encourages her to be more cautious and nicer when she hits that tweet button on Twitter...or just get off it altogether, which may be best for her.

I will agree that Sara Gilbert can be kind of cold and robotic sometimes (and it seems like her lawyer force fed her the statement she made about the firing on The Talk), but I think that's just because she's introverted and it's all over a tragic situation that wasn't easy to address. I don't think she took over the show by continuing on and excluding her, she just wants to not see others lose their livelihood over this unfortunate event and understands that America is still interested in the story of this family.

I hope she comments on the reboot next week on her show, The Talk. I don't expect any spoilers, but am anxious for the next fall season to see how they address the exclusion of Roseanne.

As far as I'm concerned the show should have stayed in the 90's. I'm not interested in any reboot that kills her off. I didn't like it when they killed Dan and I don't like it now. I think the show will probably flop big time after the initial curiosity has worn out. I just can't see how this show can go on because Roseanne was just too big of a character to sweep out and act like she wasn't there. She's always going to hang over that show.

I won't doubt they'll do what they did with Valerie Harper on Valerie/The Hogan Family. Roseanne DOES get killed-off and enter...The Connors.

I may watch that show since the supporting cast was better than Roseanne!

Sara Gilbert is "so excited" about Roseanne spinoff The Conners (https://people.com/tv/sara-gilbert-excited-roseanne-spinoff/)
“I’m so excited, thank you all so much. I really appreciate it,” Gilbert said on Monday's The Talk after co-host Sharon Osbourne congratulated her on the news.

Wawwie, knock it off with the insults and the profanity. Learn to disagree with others without acting like a brute.

Roseanne Barr: "I didn't ask to be paid off, I asked for nothing" in Roseanne spinoff negotiations (https://theblast.com/roseanne-spinoff-interview-no-money/)
In a new interview with Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, Barr says of clearing the way for The Conners: "I just stepped away … because that is penance. I put a lot of thought into it.” Roseanne added that she especially wanted to have the show carry on because of her TV granddaughter, played by Jayden Rey. "She loved me and I loved her,” Barr says of Rey. “And I did not want her … to not have a job, because she’s great. And I did not want her to think that badly of Jewish people and me in specifically.”

I definitely have more sympathy for Roseanne after hearing that interview with the Rabbi. I don't think she's a racist, she just made a mistake. She did the right thing by giving up the show.

Roseanne is considering making a return to TV. The talks are there, but no production company has confirmed this yet.

http://abc7.com/entertainment/roseanne-barr-coming-back-to-tv/3689052/

This is going to be a failure. But I don't care because I've always hated Roseanne, both the woman and the TV series.

Ed.

Roseanne is considering making a return to TV. The talks are there, but no production company has confirmed this yet.

http://abc7.com/entertainment/roseanne-barr-coming-back-to-tv/3689052/

I hope it's something on FOX that airs in direct competition with the Connors and crushes them in ratings. Roseanne will have the last laugh. :lol:

ABC Officially Orders "Roseanne" Spin-off "The Conners" without Roseanne Barr
by Lynette Rice
July 12, 2018


After weeks of rumors and speculation, ABC finally confirmed what many assumed (or hoped) would happen: "Roseanne" will go on without Roseanne Barr. ABC announced Thursday that it will soon begin production on 10 episodes of a revival of the revival called "The Conners".

Here’s the official logline from the network: “After a sudden turn of events, the Conners are forced to face the daily struggles of life in Lanford in a way they never have before. This iconic family – Dan, Jackie, Darlene, Becky and D.J. – grapples with parenthood, dating, an unexpected pregnancy, financial pressures, aging, and in-laws in working-class America. Through it all, the fights, the coupon cutting, the hand-me-downs, the breakdowns – with love, humor and perseverance, the family prevails.”




It’s unclear for now how the absence of the family matriarch will be addressed.

But at least it means that all of the key cast members who returned for last season’s revival will participate in the new iteration, including John Goodman (Dan), Laurie Metcalf (Jackie), Sara Gilbert (Darlene), Lecy Goranson (Becky) and Michael Fishman (D.J.).




Of particular note: ABC made sure to address in its announcement that Barr would have no financial or creative involvement in the new series.

Minutes later, Barr released this statement: “I regret the circumstances that have caused me to be removed from Roseanne. I agreed to the settlement in order that 200 jobs of beloved cast and crew could be saved, and I wish the best for everyone involved.”

Executive Producer Tom Werner added, “We are grateful to have reached this agreement to keep our team working as we continue to explore stories of the Conner family.”




ABC and the cast released their own comments, too.

“The Conners’ stories demonstrate that families can always find common ground through conversation, laughter and love. The spinoff will continue to portray contemporary issues that are as relevant today as they were 30 years ago,” according to ABC.

“We have received a tremendous amount of support from fans of our show, and it’s clear that these characters not only have a place in our hearts, but in the hearts and homes of our audience,” added the cast in a “joint” statement. “We all came back last season because we wanted to tell stories about the challenges facing a working-class family today. We are so happy to have the opportunity to return with the cast and crew to continue to share those stories through love and laughter.”

http://ew.com/tv/2018/06/21/roseanne-spinoff-official-abc/

I won't watch and will laugh when it's cancelled. That Sara Gilbert woman is a nasty piece of work. Stabbed Roseanne right between the shoulder blades.

If it weren't for Roseanne, she'd be slinging hash at the local IHOP.

IHOP serves HASH??? GET OUT!!!

It's call IHOB now.

Not anymore. IHOB is now back to IHOP once again because it was all a promotion stunt for their new burgers.

That was a dirty trick.

That was a dirty trick.

"Dirty" like Sara Gilbert who "stole the show" away from Roseanne :lol:

"Dirty" like Sara Gilbert who "stole the show" away from Roseanne :lol:

Stop it ;)

Roseanne made a comment that ultimately got her fired from her show.

The network decided to continue the show and offered it to Sara Gilbert and the rest of the cast.

I don't know how that constitutes "stealing" a show.

Roseanne made a comment that ultimately got her fired from her show.

The network decided to continue the show and offered it to Sara Gilbert and the rest of the cast.

I don't know how that constitutes "stealing" a show.

No more than when an assistant coach is promoted to head coach after the head coach is fired.

Not like Sara made that tweet or forced ABC to fire Roseanne. :lol:

No more than when an assistant coach is promoted to head coach after the head coach is fired.

Not like Sara made that tweet or forced ABC to fire Roseanne. :lol:
Yea and I'm still stuck on that idiot assistant coach 8 years later. Can't get rid of him. Jason Garrett sucks.

As for Sara, I don't give a damn about her. Don't think the show will be successful Should have just cancelled it instead of continuing to try to damage it's legacy. But oh well.. I didn't watch the later episodes of Roseanne in the 90's and won't here either. I'll do what I did with Dallas when TNT tried to damage its legacy...ignore it.

Roseanne made a comment that ultimately got her fired from her show.

The network decided to continue the show and offered it to Sara Gilbert and the rest of the cast.

I don't know how that constitutes "stealing" a show.

In my view it does constitute stealing. Especially when it was ALL Gilbert's idea to bring back Roseanne's show and be Executive Producer of it. SHE went to Roseanne with this whole idea and had to convince her to go along with it.

If not for snake Gilbert, the show would have stayed in the 1990's where it belonged. But Gilbert, snake that she is saw dollar signs by bringing the show back from the dead.

Barr already had enough dollars and at 65 was hesitant to go along with it. THis whole project was Gilberts baby right from the start and when Barr made that tweet, all snake head Gilbert seemed to care about is keeping the show that she was Exec Producer of to continue....even if that meant tossing the person that gave her the career she enjoyed for 30+ years under the bus.

Now Gilbert's the main star and producer and that to me is STEALING. And from someone that gave her everything makes it all the more sickening.

Now flame me and fire away the insults, but I won't care because the majority of America agrees with this consensus....and the dismal ratings and 2019 cancellation of "The Connors" will prove it.

Sara Gilbert is one Feckless you know what.

In my view it does constitute stealing. Especially when it was ALL Gilbert's idea to bring back Roseanne's show and be Executive Producer of it. SHE went to Roseanne with this whole idea and had to convince her to go along with it.

If not for snake Gilbert, the show would have stayed in the 1990's where it belonged. But Gilbert, snake that she is saw dollar signs by bringing the show back from the dead.

Barr already had enough dollars and at 65 was hesitant to go along with it. THis whole project was Gilberts baby right from the start and when Barr made that tweet, all snake head Gilbert seemed to care about is keeping the show that she was Exec Producer of to continue....even if that meant tossing the person that gave her the career she enjoyed for 30+ years under the bus.

Now Gilbert's the main star and producer and that to me is STEALING. And from someone that gave her everything makes it all the more sickening.

Now flame me and fire away the insults, but I won't care because the majority of America agrees with this consensus....and the dismal ratings and 2019 cancellation of "The Connors" will prove it.

Sara Gilbert is one Feckless you know what.

It's not stealing and here's why.

1). Gilbert was co-executive producer on the Roseanne reboot along with Roseanne Barr, so she had some ownership.
2). It's a spin-off of the Roseanne reboot. It's not even the same show. Same characters and plot but different show. And this leads me to my third point...
3). Roseanne agreed to give up creative control to the cast and crew. No stealing if she agreed to give it away. Also, Gilbert and Barr BOTH wanted to save the show, it wasn't just Gilbert. They defended keeping the show to save the whole cast and crew's jobs.

Roseanne was bound to create a problem for the show based on her political incorrect nature. Yet, ABC ignored all the red flags and hired her again.

Roseanne is the only person who threw herself under the bus. It was herself that tweeted it, and she only has herself to blame.

Gilbert does not have to bound her loyalty to Roseanne just because she helped her career. If she defended her tweet, it would make her look bad. Why would she sacrifice that? It would wreck her career, too, if she defended Roseanne's tweet. Also, Glibert doesn't need Roseanne to keep her career going, she has The Talk and has had acting stints elsewhere like on The Big Bang Theory. Roseanne has a 30 year old career? Please. She's been out of the lime-light for years and only pops in and out for some publicity or political stunts. I would hardly call that a career. She has a hard time finding a career since Roseanne ended.

I think The Conners is going to be successful because people still have an interest in this family and their story, even sans Roseanne. It may not be as successful as the reboot or the original, but I think it will stay on and people will tune in.

It's not stealing and here's why.

1). Gilbert was co-executive producer on the Roseanne reboot along with Roseanne Barr, so she had some ownership.
2). It's a spin-off of the Roseanne reboot. It's not even the same show. Same characters and plot but different show. And this leads me to my third point...

Lame excuse. It's STILL the same show no matter how you try and spin it. If it weren't for Roseanne, "The Connors" wouldn't exist in any stretch of the imagination.

3). Roseanne agreed to give up creative control to the cast and crew. No stealing if she agreed to give it away. Also, Gilbert and Barr BOTH wanted to save the show, it wasn't just Gilbert. They defended keeping the show to save the whole cast and crew's jobs.

You can believe that, but I don't no matter what she said in her Tweets. I believe Roseanne was pressured and bullied to give up the creative control by ABC and caved.

Roseanne was bound to create a problem for the show based on her political incorrect nature. Yet, ABC ignored all the red flags and hired her again.

Roseanne is the only person who threw herself under the bus. It was herself that tweeted it, and she only has herself to blame.

No it was ABC who fired her. Roseanne didn't fire herself. And when ABC fired her, snake Gilbert threw her under the bus and took over a show that wasn't hers.

Gilbert does not have to bound her loyalty to Roseanne just because she helped her career. If she defended her tweet, it would make her look bad. Why would she sacrifice that? It would wreck her career, too, if she defended Roseanne's tweet. Also, Glibert doesn't need Roseanne to keep her career going, she has The Talk and has had acting stints elsewhere like on The Big Bang Theory. Roseanne has a 30 year old career? Please. She's been out of the lime-light for years and only pops in and out for some publicity or political stunts. I would hardly call that a career. She has a hard time finding a career since Roseanne ended.

You are correct. She threw Roseanne under the bus for fear of Nazi Hollywood destroying her career too. If you fall out of step in Hollywood and don't subscribe to their way, you're out forever. Snake Gilbert knew this and immediately distanced herself from the person who made her. Nice.

And you misinterpreted by post about 30+ years. I wasn't referring to Roseanne's career, but snake Gilbert's. She's enjoyed herself a 30+ year career all because of Roseanne. And this is the payback she gives. Tossing her aside and stealing her show.

I think The Conners is going to be successful because people still have an interest in this family and their story, even sans Roseanne. It may not be as successful as the reboot or the original, but I think it will stay on and people will tune in.

I disagree. People have an interest in Roseanne, Dan and Jackie. The rest are all minor characters no one cares much about. People will tune in for the premiere to see how they kill Roseanne off, but they won't stick around to listen to 30 mins of liberal indoctrination, boys wearing dresses, etc....America is sick of it and ratings will show.

I bet you a quarter "The Connors" gets cancelled by spring 2019 and I'd love to see Roseanne be courted buy FOX and she accepts and has a show alongside Tim Allen's "Last Man Standing". It will be a sweet victory for both and surely the highest rated hour of television for the week.

I disagree. People have an interest in Roseanne, Dan and Jackie. The rest are all minor characters no one cares much about. People will tune in for the premiere to see how they kill Roseanne off, but they won't stick around to listen to 30 mins of liberal indoctrination, boys wearing dresses, etc....America is sick of it and ratings will show.

I bet you a quarter "The Connors" gets cancelled by spring 2019 and I'd love to see Roseanne be courted buy FOX and she accepts and has a show alongside Tim Allen's "Last Man Standing". It will be a sweet victory for both and surely the highest rated hour of television for the week.
I do agree. It was always Roseanne, Dan and Jackie. The other characters were good in small doses. And what made characters like Darlene work was the relationship between her and her parents. ABC knows that too otherwise they would have just spun Darlene off. They needed Dan and Jackie there. And look there have been plenty of actors on shows I liked that I probably wouldn't care for in real life. That doesn't mean you should ruin the show and kill them off. I mean Roseanne was doing crazy things in the 90's and ABC never thought of firing her.

I do agree. It was always Roseanne, Dan and Jackie. The other characters were good in small doses. And what made characters like Darlene work was the relationship between her and her parents. ABC knows that too otherwise they would have just spun Darlene off. They needed Dan and Jackie there. And look there have been plenty of actors on shows I liked that I probably wouldn't care for in real life. That doesn't mean you should ruin the show and kill them off. I mean Roseanne was doing crazy things in the 90's and ABC never thought of firing her.

Very true. Roseanne ran her offensive mouth constantly in the 90's and it wasn't career destroying as it is today. They still won't even play the reruns of the original show. It's absurd!
We're living in very weird times and I don't think anyone under 30 can fully grasp that. Up is down, down is up, off is on etc....it's like the world has fallen down the rabbit hole.

Roseanne should've never been resurrected and brought into this era. It's 9 season legacy is now forever tarnished with this whole debacle and that's a real shame.

Best. News. Ever.I wouldnt watch it even if it was on analogue cable!!

Piece of garbage........ What she did WAS NO BIG DEAL!!!!!!!!!!!! (Not as bad as what that other lady called Donnys daughter)

If it weren't for Roseanne, "The Connors" wouldn't exist in any stretch of the imagination.

Actually, it could have. The show was created by Matt Williams, and it wasn't until later that they gave Barr co-creator credit. Also, they even thought about axing Roseanne Barr from the show when it ran in the '90s, but I guess they didn't have the balls to do it. The show could have existed without its titular character in the '90s. There was actually a lot of rumors that they wanted to fire her.

You can believe that, but I don't no matter what she said in her Tweets. I believe Roseanne was pressured and bullied to give up the creative control by ABC and caved.

Pressured and bullied? According to what source? According to multiple reports including this one (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/abcs-roseanne-spinoff-hinges-barr-relinquishing-fee-1120723) that I've read, Roseanne full-willingly gave up the show because she knew she had done wrong and made that sacrifice to show that she was truly sorry. She wanted to do it. To be honest, she really didn't care that much about the reboot in the first place (both you and I know she dragged her feet on it) so it wasn't that hard for her to do. She was only upset because she got called out for a racist comment, which it was. And she's still in denial about it, and wants our sympathy.

No it was ABC who fired her. Roseanne didn't fire herself. And when ABC fired her, snake Gilbert threw her under the bus and took over a show that wasn't hers.

Yes, I know that ABC fired her but my point was, Roseanne was a ticking time bomb and she threw herself in front of the bus that held the whole cast and crew. People were already threatening to leave (including Sykes and Kenney), and there's no way the show would've lasted if Roseanne was kept on the show. You act like Gilbert was the only one that didn't defend her, no, it was a lot more than just her. Anyone with a brain would not defend her. So she's a snake because she didn't defend her and she protected the cast and crew's jobs? OK, I don't see your logic at all. I'll also repeat it again: Gilbert was co-executive producer of the reboot, so she shared a piece of the pie. How can you steal something that's part yours? :rolleyes:

Oh, and guess what? What you fail to see is they both saved the show when Roseanne gave up creative and financial control (and cut herself out of the show, obviously) and they the cast and crew agreed to do the spin-off idea.

You are correct. She threw Roseanne under the bus for fear of Nazi Hollywood destroying her career too. If you fall out of step in Hollywood and don't subscribe to their way, you're out forever. Snake Gilbert knew this and immediately distanced herself from the person who made her. Nice.

So it's "Nazi" Hollywood because she wouldn't defend a racist remark? What? I think you have it backwards. Also...comparing liberals to Nazis? Really? There's no comparison whatsoever. Seems like a lame attempt to discredit an entire party when there's no association whatsoever.

Remember, it was Roseanne was the one that dressed up as a Nazi on that magazine cover. If anything, Roseanne was destroying her own career by alienating people with her anti-semitism and her racist remarks over the years. Gilbert just had had enough and distanced herself completely when it directly effect her, which I can't really blame her for, because why would she want to be associated with someone anymore who has clearly lost it? Also expecting someone to faithfully pledge allegiance to someone regardless of their questionable morals?? Having supreme obedience to someone regardless of what they say or do would be something a Nazi would do. You have it wayyyyyy backwards.


I disagree. People have an interest in Roseanne, Dan and Jackie. The rest are all minor characters no one cares much about. People will tune in for the premiere to see how they kill Roseanne off, but they won't stick around to listen to 30 mins of liberal indoctrination, boys wearing dresses, etc....America is sick of it and ratings will show.

I bet you a quarter "The Connors" gets cancelled by spring 2019 and I'd love to see Roseanne be courted buy FOX and she accepts and has a show alongside Tim Allen's "Last Man Standing". It will be a sweet victory for both and surely the highest rated hour of television for the week.

Roseanne's sitcom career is over. FOX is not gonna willingly tout someone who's clearly mentally unstable now as a lead role on a sitcom. Also, even comparing Roseanne's political views to Tim Allen's is like comparing two different breeds.

And, uh, Roseanne and Dan's kids are minor characters? Oh ok. They're just as much as a part of the show as Roseanne, Dan and Jackie. It's about a struggling FAMILY that people could to and that's why people watched, not because of certain characters.

Lastly, just because the reboot will present one of many viewpoints that's different from yours, doesn't make it indoctrination or be the reason why Americans won't like it. Not everyone is closed minded like you :rolleyes:

Actually, it could have. The show was created by Matt Williams, and it wasn't until later that they gave Barr co-creator credit. Also, they even thought about axing Roseanne Barr from the show when it ran in the '90s, but I guess they didn't have the balls to do it. The show could have existed without its titular character in the '90s. There was actually a lot of rumors that they wanted to fire her.



Pressured and bullied? According to what source? According to multiple reports including this one (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/abcs-roseanne-spinoff-hinges-barr-relinquishing-fee-1120723) that I've read, Roseanne full-willingly gave up the show because she knew she had done wrong and made that sacrifice to show that she was truly sorry. She wanted to do it. To be honest, she really didn't care that much about the reboot in the first place (both you and I know she dragged her feet on it) so it wasn't that hard for her to do. She was only upset because she got called out for a racist comment, which it was. And she's still in denial about it, and wants our sympathy.



Yes, I know that ABC fired her but my point was, Roseanne was a ticking time bomb and she threw herself in front of the bus that held the whole cast and crew. People were already threatening to leave (including Sykes and Kenney), and there's no way the show would've lasted if Roseanne was kept on the show. You act like Gilbert was the only one that didn't defend her, no, it was a lot more than just her. Anyone with a brain would not defend her. So she's a snake because she didn't defend her and she protected the cast and crew's jobs? OK, I don't see your logic at all. I'll also repeat it again: Gilbert was co-executive producer of the reboot, so she shared a piece of the pie. How can you steal something that's part yours? :rolleyes:

Oh, and guess what? What you fail to see is they both saved the show when Roseanne gave up creative and financial control (and cut herself out of the show, obviously) and they the cast and crew agreed to do the spin-off idea.



So it's "Nazi" Hollywood because she wouldn't defend a racist remark? What? I think you have it backwards. Also...comparing liberals to Nazis? Really? There's no comparison whatsoever. Seems like a lame attempt to discredit an entire party when there's no association whatsoever.

Remember, it was Roseanne was the one that dressed up as a Nazi on that magazine cover. If anything, Roseanne was destroying her own career by alienating people with her anti-semitism and her racist remarks over the years. Gilbert just had had enough and distanced herself completely when it directly effect her, which I can't really blame her for, because why would she want to be associated with someone anymore who has clearly lost it? Also expecting someone to faithfully pledge allegiance to someone regardless of their questionable morals?? Having supreme obedience to someone regardless of what they say or do would be something a Nazi would do. You have it wayyyyyy backwards.




Roseanne's sitcom career is over. FOX is not gonna willingly tout someone who's clearly mentally unstable now as a lead role on a sitcom. Also, even comparing Roseanne's political views to Tim Allen's is like comparing two different breeds.

And, uh, Roseanne and Dan's kids are minor characters? Oh ok. They're just as much as a part of the show as Roseanne, Dan and Jackie. It's about a struggling FAMILY that people could to and that's why people watched, not because of certain characters.

Lastly, just because the reboot will present one of many viewpoints that's different from yours, doesn't make it indoctrination or be the reason why Americans won't like it. Not everyone is closed minded like you :rolleyes:

Your reply is all over the place and makes no sense. I'm not going to respond to each paragraph, but will condense in a nutshell.

You accuse Roseanne, a Jewish person, of "anti semitism". Absurd!

You say "The Connors" could still have existed without Roseanne. Wrong. The Connors was an idea created by Roseanne back in the 80's. So my statement firmly stands that "The Connors" would never exist without Roseanne, being the creator of the family.

It doesn't matter that snake Gilbert was Exec Producer of the reboot. It was originally Barr's show. HERS. Snake Gilbert coerced Roseanne to reboot the show, with the snake as co Exec Producer.
She probably (and rightly) knew she couldn't ever be Exec Producer of her own sitcom creation, so uses Roseanne's show with a built in audience.

And without Roseanne, the creator, this will sink quickly to the bottom of the television swamp. And that's what television is these days.

And comparing liberals to Nazis is quite apt. One word to back that up....Antifa. They're certainly not conservatives!

Whether Roseanne comes back with another sitcom or not is speculation. Who knows? Given her age, she may just be done with it all and I certainly wouldn't blame her. I hope she does, because there are millions of fans that would happily welcome her to TV.

Nazi Hollywood may have destroyed her legacy, but for us loyal fans, her wonderful legacy is still intact!! It's pretty ironic you know....us Conservatives are the ones that truly practice love and tolerance. Isn't that funny? We don't hate everything under the sun like the loony liberals do.

What a sad way to live with all that hate.

Actually, it could have. The show was created by Matt Williams, and it wasn't until later that they gave Barr co-creator credit. Also, they even thought about axing Roseanne Barr from the show when it ran in the '90s, but I guess they didn't have the balls to do it. The show could have existed without its titular character in the '90s. There was actually a lot of rumors that they wanted to fire her.



Pressured and bullied? According to what source? According to multiple reports including this one (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/abcs-roseanne-spinoff-hinges-barr-relinquishing-fee-1120723) that I've read, Roseanne full-willingly gave up the show because she knew she had done wrong and made that sacrifice to show that she was truly sorry. She wanted to do it. To be honest, she really didn't care that much about the reboot in the first place (both you and I know she dragged her feet on it) so it wasn't that hard for her to do. She was only upset because she got called out for a racist comment, which it was. And she's still in denial about it, and wants our sympathy.



Yes, I know that ABC fired her but my point was, Roseanne was a ticking time bomb and she threw herself in front of the bus that held the whole cast and crew. People were already threatening to leave (including Sykes and Kenney), and there's no way the show would've lasted if Roseanne was kept on the show. You act like Gilbert was the only one that didn't defend her, no, it was a lot more than just her. Anyone with a brain would not defend her. So she's a snake because she didn't defend her and she protected the cast and crew's jobs? OK, I don't see your logic at all. I'll also repeat it again: Gilbert was co-executive producer of the reboot, so she shared a piece of the pie. How can you steal something that's part yours? :rolleyes:

Oh, and guess what? What you fail to see is they both saved the show when Roseanne gave up creative and financial control (and cut herself out of the show, obviously) and they the cast and crew agreed to do the spin-off idea.



So it's "Nazi" Hollywood because she wouldn't defend a racist remark? What? I think you have it backwards. Also...comparing liberals to Nazis? Really? There's no comparison whatsoever. Seems like a lame attempt to discredit an entire party when there's no association whatsoever.

Remember, it was Roseanne was the one that dressed up as a Nazi on that magazine cover. If anything, Roseanne was destroying her own career by alienating people with her anti-semitism and her racist remarks over the years. Gilbert just had had enough and distanced herself completely when it directly effect her, which I can't really blame her for, because why would she want to be associated with someone anymore who has clearly lost it? Also expecting someone to faithfully pledge allegiance to someone regardless of their questionable morals?? Having supreme obedience to someone regardless of what they say or do would be something a Nazi would do. You have it wayyyyyy backwards.




Roseanne's sitcom career is over. FOX is not gonna willingly tout someone who's clearly mentally unstable now as a lead role on a sitcom. Also, even comparing Roseanne's political views to Tim Allen's is like comparing two different breeds.

And, uh, Roseanne and Dan's kids are minor characters? Oh ok. They're just as much as a part of the show as Roseanne, Dan and Jackie. It's about a struggling FAMILY that people could to and that's why people watched, not because of certain characters.

Lastly, just because the reboot will present one of many viewpoints that's different from yours, doesn't make it indoctrination or be the reason why Americans won't like it. Not everyone is closed minded like you :rolleyes:
Where did you hear that they were thinking of firing Roseanne in the 90's? I followed television very closely back then. Cut out Newspaper articles ( some I still have) and I still collect TV Guides. Not once did I ever read that they were even thinking of firing her. And let me tell you she was looney toons back then. And no the show couldn't have lasted without her. There is only one show at the time that survived losing it's star and that was The Hogan Family. And that show was not a big hit. The only other show I can even think of that survived a major cast change like that was NYPD Blue and that was really Dennis Franz's show. Dan and Jackie were good because they played well off of Roseanne. So did the kids. I mean she was the one that made the show funny.

I'm sorry but I want Roseanne Barr back. She was the show and will always be the show. We the viewing public do not find her or her comments "offensive". If she "tweets' (a non word I hate) says something outlandish or dangerous, then take steps. But this Valarie Jarett person could just sue for defamation and the show still stays on.

Your reply is all over the place and makes no sense. I'm not going to respond to each paragraph, but will condense in a nutshell.

You accuse Roseanne, a Jewish person, of "anti semitism". Absurd!

You say "The Connors" could still have existed without Roseanne. Wrong. The Connors was an idea created by Roseanne back in the 80's. So my statement firmly stands that "The Connors" would never exist without Roseanne, being the creator of the family.

It doesn't matter that snake Gilbert was Exec Producer of the reboot. It was originally Barr's show. HERS. Snake Gilbert coerced Roseanne to reboot the show, with the snake as co Exec Producer.
She probably (and rightly) knew she couldn't ever be Exec Producer of her own sitcom creation, so uses Roseanne's show with a built in audience.

And without Roseanne, the creator, this will sink quickly to the bottom of the television swamp. And that's what television is these days.

And comparing liberals to Nazis is quite apt. One word to back that up....Antifa. They're certainly not conservatives!

Whether Roseanne comes back with another sitcom or not is speculation. Who knows? Given her age, she may just be done with it all and I certainly wouldn't blame her. I hope she does, because there are millions of fans that would happily welcome her to TV.

Nazi Hollywood may have destroyed her legacy, but for us loyal fans, her wonderful legacy is still intact!! It's pretty ironic you know....us Conservatives are the ones that truly practice love and tolerance. Isn't that funny? We don't hate everything under the sun like the loony liberals do.

What a sad way to live with all that hate.

I found her posing as Hitler offensive. Yes, I know it was from a Jewish satire magazine but there was absolutely nothing funny about it and it comes across as anti-semitic, even when Roseanne is Jewish.

Roseanne also didn't become a co-creator of the show until after it premiered. The entire concept was Matt Williams' idea. The show could've easily existed without her. It wasn't her show to even begin with!

I'm not even gonna try to argue any of your points about "Nazi Hollywood," because it absolutely makes no sense and it's offensive that you call liberals Nazis. It's just plain absurd.

Where did you hear that they were thinking of firing Roseanne in the 90's? I followed television very closely back then. Cut out Newspaper articles ( some I still have) and I still collect TV Guides. Not once did I ever read that they were even thinking of firing her. And let me tell you she was looney toons back then. And no the show couldn't have lasted without her. There is only one show at the time that survived losing it's star and that was The Hogan Family. And that show was not a big hit. The only other show I can even think of that survived a major cast change like that was NYPD Blue and that was really Dennis Franz's show. Dan and Jackie were good because they played well off of Roseanne. So did the kids. I mean she was the one that made the show funny.

37 Unbelievable Behind-the-Scenes Stories From "Roseanne" (https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/entertainment/news/g5141/roseanne-behind-the-scenes-stories/?slide=5)

ABC Fall Premiere Dates: "The Conners" Arrives in October
by Nellie Andreeva
July 24, 2018


"Roseanne" fans will have to wait a little longer for the Roseanne Barr-less spin-off series "The Conners".

"The Conners" is slated to premiere on October 16th.

https://deadline.com/2018/07/abc-fall-premiere-dates-the-conners-the-rookie-greys-anatomy-the-good-doctor-1202432280/

ABC's Channing Dungey on Roseanne Barr's firing over racist tweet: "In some ways, this was a last straw" (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/abcs-channing-dungey-roseanne-cancellation-losing-kenya-barris-more-modern-family-1133024)
More than two months after canceling Roseanne and essentially firing Barr, ABC Entertainment president Channing Dungey says she wouldn't have done anything differently. She also says her decision "wasn't that difficult." Dungey also noted that she had been asked about Barr's Twitter account a year ago. "It's not a secret that she has had a tendency in the past to be sort of outspoken and go off-book," said Dungey. "We've had multiple conversations about wanting to keep the focus on the show and not to let some of the other stuff eclipse the show. So, in some ways, this was a last straw. But it was also such an egregious tweet that it felt like no matter what, there would have been some action that we would have taken." She adds: "I think the swift, decisive action really spoke volumes and I think we're proud of what we did."

ALSO:

"The Conners’ have started to take a cue from Marvel and Shondaland in terms of holding everything close," says Dungey on the spinoff's secrecy (https://www.indiewire.com/2018/08/abc-keeping-the-conners-under-wraps-as-producers-employ-a-marvel-style-secrecy-1201992064/)
Dungey has seen three outlines for The Conners (https://deadline.com/2018/08/abc-channing-dungey-canceling-roseanne-the-conners-tca-1202442084/): "What I can tell you us that thematically we will be focusing on a lot of the same themes that we were in the first nine episodes"
Dungey on Black-ish creator Kenya Barris' exit: He was "frustrated" by the limitations of broadcast TV (https://www.thewrap.com/abc-channing-dungey-kenya-barris-frustrated-limitations-broadcast-tv/)
Dungey talks life without Shonda Rhimes, says ABC might add another Marvel show (https://deadline.com/2018/08/abc-boss-another-marvel-series-life-without-shanda-rhimes-in-the-fold-tca-1202442165/)
Dungey on American Idol Season 2: "We’re hoping this year to do even more of the live shows" (https://variety.com/2018/tv/news/abc-roseanne-kenya-barris-fox-1202898539/)

Roseanne is being killed off.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/john-goodman-on-roseannes-fate/ar-BBMwAPx?OCID=ansmsnnews11

Roseanne is being killed off.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/john-goodman-on-roseannes-fate/ar-BBMwAPx?OCID=ansmsnnews11

In the final episode, it could be revealed that it's all a part of Dan's book. His way at getting back at Roseanne for killing him off of her's. ;)

The whole thing is stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NO ONE SHOULD WATCH THIS GARBAGE!!!!!!!!! -- ROSANNE DID NOTHING WRONG!

ROSANNE DID NOTHING WRONG!

Wow! You're kidding, right?

The whole thing is stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NO ONE SHOULD WATCH THIS GARBAGE!!!!!!!!! -- ROSANNE DID NOTHING WRONG!

Seriously?!!!! Yes she did!!

Roseanne's grandkids are on board for The Conners (https://tvline.com/2018/08/28/the-conners-season-1-cast-roseanne-spinoff-emma-kenney/)
Emma Kenney, Ames McNamara and Jayden Rey are officially on board for the Roseanne spinoff as series regulars. ALSO: Roseanne Barr thanks John Goodman "for speaking truth about me, despite facing certain peril from producers and network" after he said she's not racist. (https://variety.com/2018/tv/news/roseanne-barr-thanks-john-goodman-racist-support-1202918854)

Wow! You're kidding, right?
WHAT ABOUT THE COMEDIAN WHO CALLED DONNYS DAUGHTER THE C WORD!!!

SHE DIDNT DO ANYTHING WRONG RIGHT?

unreal...

WHAT ABOUT THE COMEDIAN WHO CALLED DONNYS DAUGHTER THE C WORD!!!

SHE DIDNT DO ANYTHING WRONG RIGHT?

unreal...

Yeah, but that's kind of besides the point. I don't think what Samantha Bee did was as bad as what Roseanne did anyway.

Roseanne's grandkids are on board for The Conners (https://tvline.com/2018/08/28/the-conners-season-1-cast-roseanne-spinoff-emma-kenney/)
Emma Kenney, Ames McNamara and Jayden Rey are officially on board for the Roseanne spinoff as series regulars. ALSO: Roseanne Barr thanks John Goodman "for speaking truth about me, despite facing certain peril from producers and network" after he said she's not racist. (https://variety.com/2018/tv/news/roseanne-barr-thanks-john-goodman-racist-support-1202918854)
John Goodman has always been a class act. About the only reason to watch this train wreck.

Yeah, but that's kind of besides the point. I don't think what Samantha Bee did was as bad as what Roseanne did anyway.

I agree, but she still should have thought better about saying it.

Roseanne has the right to say whatever she wants publicly, but is not free from the consequences of her words and actions.

She is the reason she got fired from her own show.

Yeah, but that's kind of besides the point. I don't think what Samantha Bee did was as bad as what Roseanne did anyway.


What do you, and anyone else who wants to answer, think of Wanda Sykes when she says in her comedy acts that you can watch on YouTube "**** you whitey" or makes fun of white people being parents to black kids? Wanda makes racist jokes a lot that I no longer support her. I think it's hypocritical she was the first person to get offensive over Roseanne's racist comment when she constantly makes fun of white people in her comedy acts. Do you or others support Wanda? If so, what makes her racist behavior different than Roseanne's? Is it because it's a minority bashing white and that somehow seems acceptable in this day in age? Personally, two wrongs don't make a right so I consider both Wanda and Roseanne wrong with their behaviors.

I don't watch The Gong Show, but I read that Ken Jeong was on there last year and told every contestant he wasn't giving them a fair score because they weren't Asian. Apparently Regina Hall got so offended by Ken's racist behavior she actually told one contestant if they were Asian, she would have marked them down to spite Ken's comments. Now why aren't people making a big deal out of Wanda or Ken's racist behavior? Better yet, why is ABC treating Ken with special treatment to still continue with The Gong Show unlike Roseanne with her show?

Let's discuss Jimmy Kimmel. Now remember when Ted Danson went blackface... some time ago (we don't need to identify how many years ago), he received so much backlash stating racism. Why does Jimmy get to do what Ted Danson did only in Jimmy's case he actually mimics black athletes in his comedy skit. Why isn't that considered racist? Why aren't people judging Wanda, Ken, and Jimmy harshly like Roseanne has encountered or Ted Danson during that time? I'm curious when this whole crap against Roseanne starts being fair and justified so that all celebrities regardless of political views are treated equally. This whole picking and choosing who to crucify creates double standards and division among people.

What do you, and anyone else who wants to answer, think of Wanda Sykes when she says in her comedy acts that you can watch on YouTube "**** you whitey" or makes fun of white people being parents to black kids? Wanda makes racist jokes a lot that I no longer support her. I think it's hypocritical she was the first person to get offensive over Roseanne's racist comment when she constantly makes fun of white people in her comedy acts. Do you or others support Wanda? If so, what makes her racist behavior different than Roseanne's? Is it because it's a minority bashing white and that somehow seems acceptable in this day in age? Personally, two wrongs don't make a right so I consider both Wanda and Roseanne wrong with their behaviors.

I don't watch The Gong Show, but I read that Ken Jeong was on there last year and told every contestant he wasn't giving them a fair score because they weren't Asian. Apparently Regina Hall got so offended by Ken's racist behavior she actually told one contestant if they were Asian, she would have marked them down to spite Ken's comments. Now why aren't people making a big deal out of Wanda or Ken's racist behavior? Better yet, why is ABC treating Ken with special treatment to still continue with The Gong Show unlike Roseanne with her show?

Let's discuss Jimmy Kimmel. Now remember when Ted Danson went blackface... some time ago (we don't need to identify how many years ago), he received so much backlash stating racism. Why does Jimmy get to do what Ted Danson did only in Jimmy's case he actually mimics black athletes in his comedy skit. Why isn't that considered racist? Why aren't people judging Wanda, Ken, and Jimmy harshly like Roseanne has encountered or Ted Danson during that time? I'm curious when this whole crap against Roseanne starts being fair and justified so that all celebrities regardless of political views are treated equally. This whole picking and choosing who to crucify creates double standards and division among people.

I don't support Wanda Sykes. I'm against racism in any form and I think that there's definitely a double standard in today's world because of what's happened in American history. Still I think that Roseanne is finally getting exactly what she deserves.

What do you, and anyone else who wants to answer, think of Wanda Sykes when she says in her comedy acts that you can watch on YouTube "**** you whitey" or makes fun of white people being parents to black kids? Wanda makes racist jokes a lot that I no longer support her. I think it's hypocritical she was the first person to get offensive over Roseanne's racist comment when she constantly makes fun of white people in her comedy acts. Do you or others support Wanda? If so, what makes her racist behavior different than Roseanne's? Is it because it's a minority bashing white and that somehow seems acceptable in this day in age? Personally, two wrongs don't make a right so I consider both Wanda and Roseanne wrong with their behaviors.

I don't watch The Gong Show, but I read that Ken Jeong was on there last year and told every contestant he wasn't giving them a fair score because they weren't Asian. Apparently Regina Hall got so offended by Ken's racist behavior she actually told one contestant if they were Asian, she would have marked them down to spite Ken's comments. Now why aren't people making a big deal out of Wanda or Ken's racist behavior? Better yet, why is ABC treating Ken with special treatment to still continue with The Gong Show unlike Roseanne with her show?

Let's discuss Jimmy Kimmel. Now remember when Ted Danson went blackface... some time ago (we don't need to identify how many years ago), he received so much backlash stating racism. Why does Jimmy get to do what Ted Danson did only in Jimmy's case he actually mimics black athletes in his comedy skit. Why isn't that considered racist? Why aren't people judging Wanda, Ken, and Jimmy harshly like Roseanne has encountered or Ted Danson during that time? I'm curious when this whole crap against Roseanne starts being fair and justified so that all celebrities regardless of political views are treated equally. This whole picking and choosing who to crucify creates double standards and division among people.
That's my big problem with it. They are all a bunch of hypocrites out there. I think people have been waiting to give it to Roseanne for years and they finally have there chance. What she said was awful but I don't even think she's a racist. Just look at the history of her show. Anyway if they want to fire her and cancel the show then fine but ruining the original show's legacy by killing off the character is stupid.

What do you, and anyone else who wants to answer, think of Wanda Sykes when she says in her comedy acts that you can watch on YouTube "**** you whitey" or makes fun of white people being parents to black kids? Wanda makes racist jokes a lot that I no longer support her. I think it's hypocritical she was the first person to get offensive over Roseanne's racist comment when she constantly makes fun of white people in her comedy acts. Do you or others support Wanda? If so, what makes her racist behavior different than Roseanne's? Is it because it's a minority bashing white and that somehow seems acceptable in this day in age? Personally, two wrongs don't make a right so I consider both Wanda and Roseanne wrong with their behaviors.

I don't watch The Gong Show, but I read that Ken Jeong was on there last year and told every contestant he wasn't giving them a fair score because they weren't Asian. Apparently Regina Hall got so offended by Ken's racist behavior she actually told one contestant if they were Asian, she would have marked them down to spite Ken's comments. Now why aren't people making a big deal out of Wanda or Ken's racist behavior? Better yet, why is ABC treating Ken with special treatment to still continue with The Gong Show unlike Roseanne with her show?

Let's discuss Jimmy Kimmel. Now remember when Ted Danson went blackface... some time ago (we don't need to identify how many years ago), he received so much backlash stating racism. Why does Jimmy get to do what Ted Danson did only in Jimmy's case he actually mimics black athletes in his comedy skit. Why isn't that considered racist? Why aren't people judging Wanda, Ken, and Jimmy harshly like Roseanne has encountered or Ted Danson during that time? I'm curious when this whole crap against Roseanne starts being fair and justified so that all celebrities regardless of political views are treated equally. This whole picking and choosing who to crucify creates double standards and division among people.

The answer is very simple....Roseanne was a Trump supporter so she had to go down. I don't believe this was a race thing at all, but a direct attack by the left to destroy one of their own for supporting what they despise most and they are getting more rabid every day about it.

R.I.P., ROSEANNE: A HISTORY OF SITCOMS WHOSE LEAD CHARACTER DIED (https://www.cbr.com/sitcoms-killed-lead-character/amp/?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral)

Well, we knew she was gonna die. If she has no creative control, that means she can't ever come back, unless it's twisted of course if it's some kind of alternative/twisted reality like a good chunk of the original show was. It's very easy to have her die to since she was going in for knee surgery in the finale. I think we all know that's probably how she's gonna die.

I personally think a lot of people like those comedians you mentioned get away with racism because Hollywood is more forgiving of them and more likely to give them the benefit of the doubt because they're liberal. It's a sad reminder that media bias exists.

There's no doubt what Roseanne has done wrong, but I will agree with her and say she was directly targeted because she supports Trump. I found ABC hypocritical in many ways for their actions because they tolerated her views in the past but it just really shocked me when they cancelled the show for it. I don't think Roseanne meant it to be racist, but ABC just had to jump the gun even after she apologized. I mean, it's all done and over now but I think the show is going to carry on for quite a few seasons with this new spin-off.

What do you, and anyone else who wants to answer, think of Wanda Sykes when she says in her comedy acts that you can watch on YouTube "**** you whitey" or makes fun of white people being parents to black kids? Wanda makes racist jokes a lot that I no longer support her. I think it's hypocritical she was the first person to get offensive over Roseanne's racist comment when she constantly makes fun of white people in her comedy acts. Do you or others support Wanda? If so, what makes her racist behavior different than Roseanne's? Is it because it's a minority bashing white and that somehow seems acceptable in this day in age? Personally, two wrongs don't make a right so I consider both Wanda and Roseanne wrong with their behaviors.

I don't watch The Gong Show, but I read that Ken Jeong was on there last year and told every contestant he wasn't giving them a fair score because they weren't Asian. Apparently Regina Hall got so offended by Ken's racist behavior she actually told one contestant if they were Asian, she would have marked them down to spite Ken's comments. Now why aren't people making a big deal out of Wanda or Ken's racist behavior? Better yet, why is ABC treating Ken with special treatment to still continue with The Gong Show unlike Roseanne with her show?

Let's discuss Jimmy Kimmel. Now remember when Ted Danson went blackface... some time ago (we don't need to identify how many years ago), he received so much backlash stating racism. Why does Jimmy get to do what Ted Danson did only in Jimmy's case he actually mimics black athletes in his comedy skit. Why isn't that considered racist? Why aren't people judging Wanda, Ken, and Jimmy harshly like Roseanne has encountered or Ted Danson during that time? I'm curious when this whole crap against Roseanne starts being fair and justified so that all celebrities regardless of political views are treated equally. This whole picking and choosing who to crucify creates double standards and division among people.

I think if an entertainer offends you for whatever reason, you simply should not watch. You are expressing your opinion of them by not watching and/or patronizing them.

The answer is very simple....Roseanne was a Trump supporter so she had to go down. I don't believe this was a race thing at all, but a direct attack by the left to destroy one of their own for supporting what they despise most and they are getting more rabid every day about it.
But, they knew she was a Trump supporter when they green lighted the reboot, right?

But, they knew she was a Trump supporter when they green lighted the reboot, right?

Yes, but they also knew her history and they knew she'd slip up and say something "offensive" causing her firing and Sara Gilbert to step up as the show's front runner.

I'm not interested at all in the re-reboot. The first reboot was bad enough. I'll just stick with the original series.

No one should support this garbage!!

What she said was NO WORSE than what samantha said about Donnys daughter!! (Just no one likes Donny so they dont care)

I hate that the reboot was canned.....but ABC ASKED Roseanne to stay off of Twitter because they know her. She refused. Had she complied, she'd probably still have a show now.

It’s premiering on October 16th.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsnq_cbfIR8

What she said was NO WORSE than what samantha said about Donnys daughter!! (Just no one likes Donny so they dont care)


And what Donald Trump Jr. did by jumping on the bandwagon with James Woods making that sexist comment about Chelsea Handler doesn't make what Samantha Bee did that much worse. If you want to crucify people for their actions, please be fair to crucify everyone that acts in that manner. Picking and choosing who to judge like the extremists are doing with Roseanne instead of the other celebrities that act in that manner doesn't make your case any stronger.


The answer is very simple....Roseanne was a Trump supporter so she had to go down. I don't believe this was a race thing at all, but a direct attack by the left to destroy one of their own for supporting what they despise most and they are getting more rabid every day about it.


I agree with you. If ABC is going to allow Jimmy, Wanda, and Ken to continue making money off their network even though they display far worse acts of racism, it comes down to politics. That's the only difference between them and Roseanne.


I think if an entertainer offends you for whatever reason, you simply should not watch. You are expressing your opinion of them by not watching and/or patronizing them.


I'm going further with not just the entertainer, but the network as well. I don't plan to watch anything on ABC, including The Connors. ABC allows other celebrities to be racist and don't make a big deal out of it. It's hypocritical to punish one person for behavior that 3 or more others are doing. Personally I think Roseanne should have sued ABC. There's evidence ABC allows Jimmy and Ken to continue with their work after being racist on the network. ABC doesn't mind them trying to divide people and cause hatred in the world. Roseanne's termination was not a justice action. It was a vendetta for her being a Trump supporter. If ABC really wants to get rid of racists, then a lot more celebrities would be out of a job on that network.


What she said was awful but I don't even think she's a racist.


I don't believe she is either. I think she's one of the many extremist in the world that takes politics and her opinions too seriously. She was trying to be funny but in the end her joke was racist and offensive. She could have described Valerie in any other term than the choice she picked. She did this to herself and while I'm glad some form of punishment was done, I wish it was like this for every celebrity who thinks they can spread hate and get away with it.

The teaser for The Conners:

https://deadline.com/2018/08/the-conners-teaser-whats-next-video-john-goodman-sara-gilbert-1202455669/

And what Donald Trump Jr. did by jumping on the bandwagon with James Woods making that sexist comment about Chelsea Handler doesn't make what Samantha Bee did that much worse. If you want to crucify people for their actions, please be fair to crucify everyone that acts in that manner. Picking and choosing who to judge like the extremists are doing with Roseanne instead of the other celebrities that act in that manner doesn't make your case any stronger. I agree buddy!!!!

Roseanne is planning on moving to Israel.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/roseanne-barr-plans-on-moving-to-israel-when-abc-airs-‘the-conners’-will-not-“curse-or-bless”-abc-spinoff/ar-BBMNNK3?ocid=spartanntp

I agree with you. If ABC is going to allow Jimmy, Wanda, and Ken to continue making money off their network even though they display far worse acts of racism, it comes down to politics. That's the only difference between them and Roseanne.

Excellent point. And you are well within your rights to do so.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/roseanne-barr-tears-up-over-john-goodmans-support-after-her-firing-exclusive/ar-BBMUqGt?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

Roseanne is planning on moving to Israel.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/roseanne-barr-plans-on-moving-to-israel-when-abc-airs-‘the-conners’-will-not-“curse-or-bless”-abc-spinoff/ar-BBMNNK3?ocid=spartanntp

I dunno...I feel bad for her....... I wish her well on her travels :)

The first official photos are out already.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/the-conners-first-official-photos-are-here-see-john-goodman-sara-gilbert-and-more-reunite/ar-BBNfdDb?ocid=spartanntp

The first official photos are out already.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/the-conners-first-official-photos-are-here-see-john-goodman-sara-gilbert-and-more-reunite/ar-BBNfdDb?ocid=spartanntp

That's going to be the look on their faces when they're told "The Connors" has been cancelled.

That's going to be the look on their faces when they're told "The Connors" has been cancelled.

I can see it in their faces as well.

I hope this show is a BIG hit!

;)

Me too!

It deserves to go nowhere!!!!!!

This whole thing is ridiculous........ She has a right to an opinion..... (Even though she is wrong)

As Valerie Jarret smugly said about Roseanne, this will be a "teaching moment" for both ABC and the backstabbing vipers of the Connor cast when viewers don't tune in and it's cancelled.

And I can't WAIT! :cool:

I love how some people are soooo sure that The Conners will be cancelled.

I can't say for certain it will be a hit.

But no one else can say for certain it will flop.

Time will reveal.

I think initial ratings will be strong due to the controversy, but that remains to be seen.

;)

I love how some people are soooo sure that The Conners will be cancelled.

I can't say for certain it will be a hit.

But no one else can say for certain it will flop.

Time will reveal.

I think initial ratings will be strong due to the controversy, but that remains to be seen.

;)

True. If we lost Laurie Metcalf though I'd be worried.

True. If we lost Laurie Metcalf though I'd be worried.

They wouldn't have a show without her.

Should be interesting to see how this plays out.

As Valerie Jarret smugly said about Roseanne, this will be a "teaching moment" for both ABC and the backstabbing vipers of the Connor cast when viewers don't tune in and it's cancelled.

And I can't WAIT! :cool:

Its sad that all the other cast members are going along with this! (I thought they were all her friends)

Its sad that all the other cast members are going along with this! (I thought they were all her friends)

So did I. I was shocked none of them stood by her, and John Goodman's recent defense came way too late. They owe their careers to Roseanne which leads me to what's really behind their motives...Their careers.

They want to continue working in fascist, hateful, intolerable Hollywood and have to tow the line and keep in lockstep with it's collective views or be cast out forever like Roseanne.

Real friends would give Hollywood the finger and walk away from that toxicity, but I guess the millions their earning (off Roseanne's creation no less) are a lot more important to them. Bunch of snakes the whole lot of them. It's pathetic.

So did I. I was shocked none of them stood by her, and John Goodman's recent defense came way too late. They owe their careers to Roseanne which leads me to what's really behind their motives...Their careers.

They want to continue working in fascist, hateful, intolerable Hollywood and have to tow the line and keep in lockstep with it's collective views or be cast out forever like Roseanne.

Real friends would give Hollywood the finger and walk away from that toxicity, but I guess the millions their earning (off Roseanne's creation no less) are a lot more important to them. Bunch of snakes the whole lot of them. It's pathetic.

Did it ever occur to you that maybe some of them did not agree with what she did?

Did it ever occur to you that maybe some of them did not agree with what she did?

Did it ever occur to YOU that they've known Roseanne for 3 (THREE!) decades and most likely heard much worse coming straight from her very own mouth and never fled like she was suddenly contagious with a deadly disease?!

You expect me to believe that they all saw an 80 character sentence, a joke no less, on Twitter and all decided to collectively, at the same time, have nothing to do with her anymore?

Yeah....suuuuure!! Anyone with a brain can see what happened. They're terrified for their careers and chose to side with the studios who give them their million dollar checks. Pathetic.

What they (and you) don't realize is that the majority of America sides with Roseanne and the Connors ratings and cancellation will prove it.

As far as "what she did"?.....It was a joke. And i'm sure you recall when Roseanne first came on the scene in the late 80's/early 90's there was tons of fat jokes by late night hosts and comedians directed towards her. I clearly remember them. Yet, before this ugly PC culture kicked in, it was acceptable to make fun of someone else like that and no one was fired.

Roseanne says someone resembles an animal and her career is destroyed. Double and hypocritical standards!! So spare me the "what she did" morality. It doesn't fly.

An excellent reply!!!!!!!!!

As Valerie Jarret smugly said about Roseanne, this will be a "teaching moment" for both ABC and the backstabbing vipers of the Connor cast when viewers don't tune in and it's cancelled.

And I can't WAIT! :cool:

Way to take a statement way out of context :rolleyes: Valerie said this way before The Conners idea came to fruition. It was directed at Roseanne and not ABC, about how words matter and you have to be careful with them and not to be a racist, not about how it will be a "teachable moment" for ABC if The Conners TV show fails if people don't tune into ABC and watch them.

You are quick to justify how this show will fail by flawed arguments :rolleyes:

Did it ever occur to YOU that they've known Roseanne for 3 (THREE!) decades and most likely heard much worse coming straight from her very own mouth and never fled like she was suddenly contagious with a deadly disease?!

I will say, ABC took a risk when they asked her back, because they knew how inflammatory she had been in the past, but I think they banked on her because she knew she'd be a hit, and had an original POV that TV was lacking, that of a Trump supporter.

However, what she said in this Valerie Jarrett tweet pales in comparison to what she's said or done in the past, this tweet was just racially-motivated hate, which is inexcusable! No wonder every one quickly fled, they didn't want someone who had made such a derogatory statement regarding race on their show! It reflects badly on them and the integrity of the network!!!

She's never said something so heinous! How can you even BEGIN to compare this to what she's done in the past three decades? This has to be the worst of the worst!

You expect me to believe that they all saw an 80 character sentence, a joke no less, on Twitter and all decided to collectively, at the same time, have nothing to do with her anymore?

Yeah....suuuuure!! Anyone with a brain can see what happened. They're terrified for their careers and chose to side with the studios who give them their million dollar checks. Pathetic.

You expect me to believe that the rest of the cast is supposed to stand by something racist she said, just because she helped her careers? That's ridiculous! :lol:

What Roseanne said was inexcusable and it's perfectly fine that the cast alienated her because of what she said. So what if Roseanne helped their careers? The cast has NO obligation to defend or side with her; what she said was inflammatory and racist (Roseanne claimed it had nothing to do with her politics but it was obviously directed toward Valerie's appearance). Roseanne said herself, the revival was supposed to be about tolerance about other races, but she clearly was a hypocrite because what she uttered on twitter was racial hate.

The cast had to write her off because they didn't want an actress associated with the show that was tarnishing their theme of racial tolerance that they wanted to continue. This is why they killed her off and continued the show, not because of how big their paychecks would be!

What they (and you) don't realize is that the majority of America sides with Roseanne and the Connors ratings and cancellation will prove it.

The majority of Americans sides with what she said? According to what? Did you see all the outrage from Americans from what she said, all over the Internet? I'm pretty sure the only people that support her words are racists, the alt-right, which I don't think are the majority of Americans.

Also, a cancellation of the show won't justify what Roseanne said about Twitter on Valerie Jarrett or that a revival spin-off was a bad idea, it may just mean that the American public won't like how the writers portrayed The Conners given the circumstances that they dealt them with. We can't really say how well it will do. It's a little early for that.

As far as "what she did"?.....It was a joke. And i'm sure you recall when Roseanne first came on the scene in the late 80's/early 90's there was tons of fat jokes by late night hosts and comedians directed towards her. I clearly remember them. Yet, before this ugly PC culture kicked in, it was acceptable to make fun of someone else like that and no one was fired.

If you call it a "joke," you clearly have a sick and twisted view of humor. From what I recall, it was never acceptable on TV or anywhere in modern history to make fun of someone's appearance based on racial conditions. Why you're bringing in a fat shaming argument in here, I have no idea, as this has nothing to do with how fat someone is, we're talking about race here. But I mean, maybe the American public is not accepting of fat shaming jokes anymore because American's humor has become more progressive and accepting of body shapes, did you ever think of that? Or maybe it's just not funny.

Roseanne says someone resembles an animal and her career is destroyed. Double and hypocritical standards!! So spare me the "what she did" morality. It doesn't fly.

She called an African American lady an ape, which isn't just any animal, that animal has been used for centuries to diminish African Americans as less-than-human. If you substitute it with any other animal that does not have a racial context, it won't have the same meaning :crazy:

Way to make your defense of her "joke" by reducing it to a comment about animals in general, stripping the entire racial context of what she said, and then pulling in the double standard card to make your point look more valid...guess what? Your argument won't fly with me :happyface

Way to take a statement way out of context :rolleyes: Valerie said this way before The Conners idea came to fruition. It was directed at Roseanne and not ABC, about how words matter and you have to be careful with them and not to be a racist, not about how it will be a "teachable moment" for ABC if The Conners TV show fails if people don't tune into ABC and watch them.

You are quick to justify how this show will fail by flawed arguments :rolleyes:

What the hell are you babbling about? VJ said the repercussions Roseanne experienced would be a "teaching moment" for her. I took those same words and used it towards the repercussions that "The Connors" will experience when it's cancelled. It WILL be a "teaching moment" for them as well.
That's hardly a "flawed argument". In fact I wasn't arguing anything but taking her words and using them in another example. Can't you comprehend that basic simple fact?



You expect me to believe that the rest of the cast is supposed to stand by something racist she said, just because she helped her careers? That's ridiculous! :lol:

What Roseanne said was inexcusable and it's perfectly fine that the cast alienated her because of what she said. So what if Roseanne helped their careers? The cast has NO obligation to defend or side with her; what she said was inflammatory and racist (Roseanne claimed it had nothing to do with her politics but it was obviously directed toward Valerie's appearance). Roseanne said herself, the revival was supposed to be about tolerance about other races, but she clearly was a hypocrite because what she uttered on twitter was racial hate.

The cast had to write her off because they didn't want an actress associated with the show that was tarnishing their theme of racial tolerance that they wanted to continue. This is why they killed her off and continued the show, not because of how big their paychecks would be!

It wasn't racist. You know it. I know it. And most of America knows it. Even John Goodman acknowledged it (way too late). The only people who found her tweet racist....are racist people with racist minds. Think about that one for a bit.



The majority of Americans sides with what she said? According to what? Did you see all the outrage from Americans from what she said, all over the Internet? I'm pretty sure the only people that support her words are racists, the alt-right, which I don't think are the majority of Americans.

For everyone who was "outraged" there were twice as many who were not. And yes, the alt-right are not the majority of Americans. That's the only factual thing in your entire post.
Just like the loony far left pink hat wearing liberals aren't the majority of America either. (And thank God for that)


Also, a cancellation of the show won't justify what Roseanne said about Twitter on Valerie Jarrett or that a revival spin-off was a bad idea, it may just mean that the American public won't like how the writers portrayed The Conners given the circumstances that they dealt them with. We can't really say how well it will do. It's a little early for that.

The cancellation very much WILL justify Roseanne and her silly little tweet that made irrational heads explode. It will be America sending the message that they stand with Roseanne. Just you watch.


If you call it a "joke," you clearly have a sick and twisted view of humor. From what I recall, it was never acceptable on TV or anywhere in modern history to make fun of someone's appearance based on racial conditions. Why you're bringing in a fat shaming argument in here, I have no idea, as this has nothing to do with how fat someone is, we're talking about race here. But I mean, maybe the American public is not accepting of fat shaming jokes anymore because American's humor has become more progressive and accepting of body shapes, did you ever think of that? Or maybe it's just not funny.

No one made fun of anyone's race. That's YOUR racist mind drawing that conclusion. Did Roseanne mention color in her tweet? Did she mention race? Did she say the word "black", "African American"?
She said a woman resembled the product of an ape fornicating with a Muslim. How on earth do you draw the conclusion it was racial?
How many have commented on past president George W. Bush resembling a chimp? Many! Was that racial too?! There are white apes you know.

Roseanne herself clarified her joke wasn't racial. She made the joke, not you and not me. So the ONLY person who can say whether it was "racist" or not is her and her and she did. So your continuous argument that is was racist is shot down by facts.


She called an African American lady an ape, which isn't just any animal, that animal has been used for centuries to diminish African Americans as less-than-human. If you substitute it with any other animal that does not have a racial context, it won't have the same meaning :crazy:

It's been said for ages that man descended from apes. That includes white people too. As stated above, when calling a white person a chimp, no one cares. But liken an African American to one and heads explode. Stop it. You can't give preferential treatment to one race over another where jokes are concerned. THAT in itself is racist. If I can't liken a black person to an ape, then the same should apply to ALL colors.

Way to make your defense of her "joke" by reducing it to a comment about animals in general, stripping the entire racial context of what she said, and then pulling in the double standard card to make your point look more valid...guess what? Your argument won't fly with me :happyface

I will defend her joke forever. And reduce it to generalities? Would it have been acceptable to liken VJ to a dog?....OH but wait!....
When President Trump called Omarosa a dog recently, the crazed unhinged left accused THAT of being racist! So dog too is out of play for African Americans!

Therefore, reducing Roseanne's joke to "animals in general" as you accuse me of doing is still racist because apparently the entire animal kingdom is off limits. Therefore YOUR argument doesn't fly. (no happy face needed)

I will not further this conversation with you. It's quite clear we vehemently disagree on the matter and neither will budge on our views. We've both exhausted our points and any further arguments will only beat a dead horse. (OMG I said horse....was that racist?! Too bad.)

You're free to have the final word here. I will not respond.

What the hell are you babbling about? VJ said the repercussions Roseanne experienced would be a "teaching moment" for her. I took those same words and used it towards the repercussions that "The Connors" will experience when it's cancelled. It WILL be a "teaching moment" for them as well.
That's hardly a "flawed argument". In fact I wasn't arguing anything but taking her words and using them in another example. Can't you comprehend that basic simple fact?

OK, I see now, you're twisting the context of her remark to defend why The Conners should be cancelled. Got it.

It wasn't racist. You know it. I know it. And most of America knows it. Even John Goodman acknowledged it (way too late). The only people who found her tweet racist....are racist people with racist minds. Think about that one for a bit.

To be clear, the statement was racist. John Goodman never said the statement wasn't racist, all he said was that Roseanne wasn't a racist.

No one made fun of anyone's race. That's YOUR racist mind drawing that conclusion. Did Roseanne mention color in her tweet? Did she mention race? Did she say the word "black", "African American"?
She said a woman resembled the product of an ape fornicating with a Muslim. How on earth do you draw the conclusion it was racial?
How many have commented on past president George W. Bush resembling a chimp? Many! Was that racial too?! There are white apes you know.

Let me make this clear for you. Calling an African American an ape is considered racist. That's what's racist about it. You don't have to blatantly mention the words "black" or "African American" for it to be racist. This is how many Americans interpreted the tweet, and somehow that makes me and many other who people who agreed with this interpretation, racist? Now, that's just silly :crazy:

Calling a white person ape does NOT carry the same racial undertones as calling an African American an "ape."

Roseanne herself clarified her joke wasn't racial. She made the joke, not you and not me. So the ONLY person who can say whether it was "racist" or not is her and her and she did. So your continuous argument that is was racist is shot down by facts.

Roseanne didn't intend to be racist but she was: she was ignorant to the fact that Valerie Jarrett was an African American, and then when she used her name with the word ape in the tweet to diminish her appearance, the American public interpreted it as racist because of the history of the word ape being used to diminish African Americans. And somehow with your comment, that makes those who interpret this tweet as racist, makes them racist? Alright, how does that work? :crazy:

Also..

Just because a racist says they're not a racist doesn't make them a racist. A racist doesn't know that they're a racist until someone points out their ignorance. Roseanne saw why it was wrong after she discovered that Valerie was African American, but failed to appropriately apologize or take ownership that it was racist, instead deflecting with the "I'm sorry I offended you," which isn't a real and authentic apology. Instead she placed the blame on Valerie for being offended, instead of placing the blame on herself for making the comment. If she had took ownership of her racist remarks, I think the American public would be more forgiving.

It's been said for ages that man descended from apes. That includes white people too. As stated above, when calling a white person a chimp, no one cares. But liken an African American to one and heads explode. Stop it. You can't give preferential treatment to one race over another where jokes are concerned. THAT in itself is racist. If I can't liken a black person to an ape, then the same should apply to ALL colors.

I'm not going to be a broken record and explain why it's racist again but to say that it should apply to white people too, shows that you fail to see why it is racist....

I will defend her joke forever. And reduce it to generalities? Would it have been acceptable to liken VJ to a dog?....OH but wait!....
When President Trump called Omarosa a dog recently, the crazed unhinged left accused THAT of being racist! So dog too is out of play for African Americans!

Therefore, reducing Roseanne's joke to "animals in general" as you accuse me of doing is still racist because apparently the entire animal kingdom is off limits. Therefore YOUR argument doesn't fly. (no happy face needed)

I will not further this conversation with you. It's quite clear we vehemently disagree on the matter and neither will budge on our views. We've both exhausted our points and any further arguments will only beat a dead horse. (OMG I said horse....was that racist?! Too bad.)

You're free to have the final word here. I will not respond.

Well good. I'm not going to dignify your ignorance with a response after this either because you're going to twist my counter-argument about how it's racist as racist somehow :crazy:

Boy this thread is hot!! (maybe we should move it to the contraversal base)

Like I said before, I think the initial ratings for this will be strong because of the controversy and curiosity.

If the show is well done and can hold viewer interest, it could maintain that momentum and be a hit.

Roseanne got what she deserved. She said something vile and hateful and paid the price for it. I don't feel sorry for her at all. I wish she would just go away, but people like her never do. They're always the victim -- something straight out of our Fake President's handbook.

I hope they don't kill off Roseanne Conner. That would seem short-sighted in 2048, during the inevitable re-re-reunion.

I know my response is delayed but.........🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣

This comment is hilarious!!!!

Roseanne got what she deserved. She said something vile and hateful and paid the price for it. I don't feel sorry for her at all. I wish she would just go away, but people like her never do. They're always the victim -- something straight out of our Fake President's handbook.

:clap

I know my response is delayed but.........🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣

This comment is hilarious!!!!
Why, thanks! :lol:

Why, thanks! :lol:

Yes, man! Yeeees!!!

Tom Arnold says "oh my god" after learning Roseanne Conner's fate on live TV (https://www.etonline.com/tom-arnold-responds-to-roseanne-barrs-character-being-killed-off-on-the-conners-110409)

"Wait, I hadn’t heard. Is that true? Oh my god!” Arnold said on Watch What Happens Live when asked about Roseanne Barr's supposed spoiler on how The Conners plan to kill off her character.

OK, I see now, you're twisting the context of her remark to defend why The Conners should be cancelled. Got it.



To be clear, the statement was racist. John Goodman never said the statement wasn't racist, all he said was that Roseanne wasn't a racist.



Let me make this clear for you. Calling an African American an ape is considered racist. That's what's racist about it. You don't have to blatantly mention the words "black" or "African American" for it to be racist. This is how many Americans interpreted the tweet, and somehow that makes me and many other who people who agreed with this interpretation, racist? Now, that's just silly :crazy:

Calling a white person ape does NOT carry the same racial undertones as calling an African American an "ape."



Roseanne didn't intend to be racist but she was: she was ignorant to the fact that Valerie Jarrett was an African American, and then when she used her name with the word ape in the tweet to diminish her appearance, the American public interpreted it as racist because of the history of the word ape being used to diminish African Americans. And somehow with your comment, that makes those who interpret this tweet as racist, makes them racist? Alright, how does that work? :crazy:

Also..

Just because a racist says they're not a racist doesn't make them a racist. A racist doesn't know that they're a racist until someone points out their ignorance. Roseanne saw why it was wrong after she discovered that Valerie was African American, but failed to appropriately apologize or take ownership that it was racist, instead deflecting with the "I'm sorry I offended you," which isn't a real and authentic apology. Instead she placed the blame on Valerie for being offended, instead of placing the blame on herself for making the comment. If she had took ownership of her racist remarks, I think the American public would be more forgiving.



I'm not going to be a broken record and explain why it's racist again but to say that it should apply to white people too, shows that you fail to see why it is racist....



Well good. I'm not going to dignify your ignorance with a response after this either because you're going to twist my counter-argument about how it's racist as racist somehow :crazy:

I am thoroughly impressed with your argument. Well said!! I thank you for it as well. M African American and while I don't believe she's a racist, I do believe she messed things up for herself. She should have honored ABC's request and stayed off Twitter. Plus, to disrespect another woman seems hypocrital to me as she has been an advocate for women's rights. She has never been the one to promote the superficial beauty element when coming to women so what was up with that comment? Her fault.

John Goodman recently made a statement saying that Roseanne will be missed on The Conners.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/john-goodman-says-roseanne-is-missed-definitely-on-the-conners/ar-BBO8km0?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

John Goodman recently made a statement saying that Roseanne will be missed on The Conners.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/john-goodman-says-roseanne-is-missed-definitely-on-the-conners/ar-BBO8km0?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

John Goodman says Roseanne Barr "gave up a lot" to make The Conners possible (https://tvline.com/2018/10/09/the-conners-john-goodman-roseanne-barr-spinoff-controversy-video/)

"She gave up a lot for us to be able to do this show, and I can’t thank her enough,” Goodman said on Jimmy Kimmel Live! Goodman added that he "crashed for a couple of weeks" (https://www.etonline.com/john-goodman-says-he-crashed-after-roseanne-barrs-exit-from-roseanne-111208) after Barr was fired from Roseanne. "I mean, she is missed, definitely, but after that many years it’s like a family," he said. "And last year was so miraculous and so unreal that when it went away, it was almost like a dream. I thought, ‘Ok, I’ll be a big boy and handle this.’ And I just crashed for a couple weeks.”

Ya right if it was LIKE A FAMILY they would tell ABC to go screw themselves and they wouldnt do it w/o her!!!!!!

What a bunch of BS coming from him....... (And im sure Rosanne agrees)

This article made my morning! Seems ABC knows they screwed up! ;)


Executives at ABC now believe that their decision to fire Roseanne Barr from their revival of Roseanne was a mistake and the network’s spin-off series The Conners may flop, according to a report from Mail Online.
Two senior executives at the network told the outlet that ABC President Channing Dungey’s decision to immediately fire the actress and cancel her show after she made racially charged comments about former Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett was a “knee-jerk” decision that they would later regret.

“We didn’t think it through properly. What Roseanne did was wrong but we shouldn’t have rushed to fire her. It was almost a knee-jerk reaction by Ben [Sherwood] and Channing [Dungey] who should have launched an investigation,” one insider reportedly said. “This would have given them more time to listen to the public, advertisers and cast members to determine the best decision.”

Barr compared Jarrett to if the ‘Muslim brotherhood & Planet of the Apes had a baby,” comments that were condemned by Dungey as “abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values.” Yet one insider apparently suggested that ABC should instead have temporarily suspended her before making a final decision.

“They could’ve suspended her from the first few episodes without pay and had her return later on in the season,” the source explained. “I mean the season finale saw Roseanne going to the hospital for knee surgery. While they worked out her fate, her character could have faced serious complications and fought for her life, while simultaneously making Roseanne fight for her career with a national apology tour. “

“The morning the racist tweet scandal blew up, Roseanne offered to publicly apologize and do the rounds of every show but Ben and Channing weren’t having any of that and wanted her gone,” they continued. “Why not have her front a PSA for the network on racism and cyberbullying?”

Since Barr’s firing, the network has produced The Conners, a spinoff of Roseanne that premieres next week. However, another senior insider revealed to Mail Online that internal fears are that the new show will flop because of people’s loyalty to Barr and her character.

“When we greenlit The Conners we thought that the public would tune in to see the family return but what we’ve discovered is that people want Roseanne – they don’t want the family by themselves,” they explained.

“The marketing and publicity teams are horrified as no matter what promotional material is released – and let’s be honest it’s been limited for a show that launches next Tuesday – Roseanne’s fans come out in force stating that they won’t watch the show.”

“The comments on social media tend to skew in favor of Roseanne and slam The Conners and the cast members who came back,” they added. “Even dedicated fans of the Conner family feel conflicted about supporting a show that so swiftly eliminated the show’s matriarch and creator.”

Last month, Barr revealed that the network plans to kill her character off with an opioid overdose, after her character ended the last season revealing an addiction to painkillers.

That same source added that some figures within the company believe the show will attract less than a quarter of the viewership of Roseanne, a scenario that would leave Dungey with “many questions to answer.”

“In the end, the ratings are all that matter – and there are many people at Disney and ABC who are worried that firing Roseanne will see their Tuesday night ratings drop substantially,” they continued. “And should The Conners flop, Channing and her team will have many questions to answer. The whisper across ABC is that they will not even be a quarter of what Roseanne achieved last season.”

In July, Barr accused ABC of firing her because of her support for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, a position she said was “not allowed in Hollywood.”

Ya right if it was LIKE A FAMILY they would tell ABC to go screw themselves and they wouldnt do it w/o her!!!!!!

What a bunch of BS coming from him....... (And im sure Rosanne agrees)

It is like a family.

A dysfunctional family.

This article made my morning! Seems ABC knows they screwed up! ;)


Executives at ABC now believe that their decision to fire Roseanne Barr from their revival of Roseanne was a mistake and the network’s spin-off series The Conners may flop, according to a report from Mail Online.
Two senior executives at the network told the outlet that ABC President Channing Dungey’s decision to immediately fire the actress and cancel her show after she made racially charged comments about former Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett was a “knee-jerk” decision that they would later regret.

“We didn’t think it through properly. What Roseanne did was wrong but we shouldn’t have rushed to fire her. It was almost a knee-jerk reaction by Ben [Sherwood] and Channing [Dungey] who should have launched an investigation,” one insider reportedly said. “This would have given them more time to listen to the public, advertisers and cast members to determine the best decision.”

Barr compared Jarrett to if the ‘Muslim brotherhood & Planet of the Apes had a baby,” comments that were condemned by Dungey as “abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values.” Yet one insider apparently suggested that ABC should instead have temporarily suspended her before making a final decision.

“They could’ve suspended her from the first few episodes without pay and had her return later on in the season,” the source explained. “I mean the season finale saw Roseanne going to the hospital for knee surgery. While they worked out her fate, her character could have faced serious complications and fought for her life, while simultaneously making Roseanne fight for her career with a national apology tour. “

“The morning the racist tweet scandal blew up, Roseanne offered to publicly apologize and do the rounds of every show but Ben and Channing weren’t having any of that and wanted her gone,” they continued. “Why not have her front a PSA for the network on racism and cyberbullying?”

Since Barr’s firing, the network has produced The Conners, a spinoff of Roseanne that premieres next week. However, another senior insider revealed to Mail Online that internal fears are that the new show will flop because of people’s loyalty to Barr and her character.

“When we greenlit The Conners we thought that the public would tune in to see the family return but what we’ve discovered is that people want Roseanne – they don’t want the family by themselves,” they explained.

“The marketing and publicity teams are horrified as no matter what promotional material is released – and let’s be honest it’s been limited for a show that launches next Tuesday – Roseanne’s fans come out in force stating that they won’t watch the show.”

“The comments on social media tend to skew in favor of Roseanne and slam The Conners and the cast members who came back,” they added. “Even dedicated fans of the Conner family feel conflicted about supporting a show that so swiftly eliminated the show’s matriarch and creator.”

Last month, Barr revealed that the network plans to kill her character off with an opioid overdose, after her character ended the last season revealing an addiction to painkillers.

That same source added that some figures within the company believe the show will attract less than a quarter of the viewership of Roseanne, a scenario that would leave Dungey with “many questions to answer.”

“In the end, the ratings are all that matter – and there are many people at Disney and ABC who are worried that firing Roseanne will see their Tuesday night ratings drop substantially,” they continued. “And should The Conners flop, Channing and her team will have many questions to answer. The whisper across ABC is that they will not even be a quarter of what Roseanne achieved last season.”

In July, Barr accused ABC of firing her because of her support for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, a position she said was “not allowed in Hollywood.”

Interesting that they're having second thoughts/regrets and the show hasn't even aired yet.

I could've told them before they did it that it was going to flop. The show is called ROSEANNE and it's about ROSEANNE. "The Conners" is a joke.

I actually think it's funny they fear it'll flop and Roseanne will have the last laugh.

That same source added that some figures within the company believe the show will attract less than a quarter of the viewership of Roseanne, a scenario that would leave Dungey with “many questions to answer.”



Dungey is an African American and I believe that clouded her judgement in response to the infamous tweet. What she should've done as a professional and head of ABC was taken a step back to assess the situation from a more objective point of view, but as stated above, it was a "knee jerk" (involuntarily) reaction which to me implies she took it on a more personal level rather than objective. Not very professional in my opinion and I predict after all the dust settles, she will step down from her position for losing millions for ABC.

Now even if "The Connors" flops and they scramble to bring Roseanne back to life, make all a dream and ask Barr to come back, I hope she says no and gives them all the finger. What they did to her, (ABC and her cast mates) was unforgivable and i'd like to see other networks courting her with sitcom offers.

I believe she still owns the rights to her Roseanne character and the original 9 season sitcom and she only gave up the rights to The Connors, (correct me if i'm wrong) but she could theoretically continue her Roseanne character on another network and recast the whole family. Wouldn't that be a nice ironic twist....and the best revenge?! :clap:

And i'm sure most everyone would gladly welcome a new actress to portray Darlene over that viper, always angry looking, can't act her way out of a paper bag Sara Gilbert.

Interesting that they're having second thoughts/regrets and the show hasn't even aired yet.

I'd take that story with a huge (or should I say bigly :lol:) grain of salt, it's sourced from Breitbart, which is an alt-right "news" source that's well-known for its fake news stories. I especially wouldn't trust stories, like this one, that has all its interviews be from "one insider" or an "unnamed source" :lol:

The story is garbage and is clearly biased. I think they're giving a "knee-jerk reaction" themselves, thinking it's going to fail :lol:

I'd take that story with a huge (or should I say bigly :lol:) grain of salt, it's sourced from Breitbart, which is an alt-right "news" source that's well-known for its fake news stories. I especially wouldn't trust stories, like this one, that has all its interviews be from "one insider" or an "unnamed source" :lol:

The story is garbage and is clearly biased. I think they're giving a "knee-jerk reaction" themselves, thinking it's going to fail :lol:

You're probably right. The people who are claiming it will fail obviously have a bias; I have a bias too, but it remains to be seen whether or not The Conners will be a hit or not.

Like I've said before, I think the premiere episode will have high ratings out of curiosity due to the controversy. Hell, even I plan to watch it and I never watched Roseanne.

Since someone here is obviously paranoid in thinking the story is "garbage" and "biased" because it was on Breitbart, who only shared the story from an original source, I will share the link to that original source, which is Mail Online....a very liberal news outlet based in very liberal U.K.

And since it's based in the U.K, I very much doubt it has "bias" towards an American television show.

Enjoy :lol:


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6261259/ABC-fears-Conners-flop-without-Roseanne-Barr.html

I can very easily tell that this show will only last a few episodes and then get cancelled.

I hope this show is a huuuuuge hit!

:D

Daily Mail UK is a tabloid and is a right-wing newspaper. It's about as credible as Fox News here in the U.S. :lol:

https://www.conservapedia.com/Daily_Mail

Not sure where the conclusion was drawn that it was a liberal newspaper. If you look all over Google, all signs point that it's far right-leaning. Also, a "newspaper" can still be politically biased towards a show, even if it's from another country, because the cast and the show itself are very political. The tabloid seems like it's very much against this spin-off because like the entire cast is liberal, and it seems like The Daily Mail UK thinks it will fail because it doesn't have its strong conservative protagonist anymore.

But anyway, the haters are gonna hate. I, for one am looking forward to the premiere, and I think we're going to be shocked at how well it's going to do. About as shocked as we were when Roseanne got fired.

Daily Mail UK is a tabloid and is a right-wing newspaper. It's about as credible as Fox News here in the U.S. :lol:

https://www.conservapedia.com/Daily_Mail

Not sure where the conclusion was drawn that it was a liberal newspaper. If you look all over Google, all signs point that it's far right-leaning. Also, a "newspaper" can still be politically biased towards a show, even if it's from another country, because the cast and the show itself are very political. The tabloid seems like it's very much against this spin-off because like the entire cast is liberal, and it seems like The Daily Mail UK thinks it will fail because it doesn't have its strong conservative protagonist anymore.

But anyway, the haters are gonna hate. I, for one am looking forward to the premiere, and I think we're going to be shocked at how well it's going to do. About as shocked as we were when Roseanne got fired.

I suspect a lot of people will be watching out of curiosity tonight.

I'll be very surprised if the show even lasts a full season or the first episode gets good ratings.

But I predict that it will only get canceled after a few episodes.

I just seen the premiere episode, and while Roseanne was never my favorite character in the show, it was so weird without her around.

What would happen if they ever decide to bring her back? Retcon her death like they did Dan in the past and continue the original show? Maybe make the whole show Dan's dream?

Roseanne is lashing out over the fate of her character:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/roseanne-barr-lashes-out-after-‘the-conners’-offs-her-character/ar-BBOuk6L?ocid=spartanntp

I watched it and thought it was well done. And this is coming from someone who didn't watch the original show. It was poignant and funny at the same time.

As for Roseanne lashing out, like her Fake President, she is playing the victim card.

She made a bad decision and paid the price for it.

Move on Rosie -- nobody cares about your whining anymore.

I didn't watch it but the ratings were on par with last seasons finale so ABC will keep this garbage for a full season, but I predict ratings to quickly slide down to 1.0 and below within the next few weeks. Even with lousy ratings though, ABC will probably still renew it for next season just to save face.

By that time, it would be poetic justice to have Roseanne back on TV with her own new hit sitcom. She can play a widowed woman who lost her whole family in a fire and is starting her life over again.

And have it air opposite The Connors to twist the knife into those backstabbing vipers.

I read a recent interview with that backstabber Sara Gilbert, saying she reached out to Roseanne but she refused to contact her back. I'm glad and love Roseanne all the more for it! She's going to have the last laugh here. Bet on it. :happyface

Ratings for the premiere weren't great, but they were solid enough.

Hopefully the show will build some momentum and the ratings will get stronger.

Just know this she will have more money then you will ever know.

Just know this she will have more money then you will ever know.

True, but money can't fix her wounded ego.

You do not know Roseanne at all. She will leave the USA for awhile then return stronger then ever. Most of her fans know she is not racist will continue to support. Gilbert on the other hand will find sucking up gets her no where. When the Connors ends she will just fade into the dark

By the way have you ever condemned Whoppi Goldberg for her remarks. She is known to make off the cut remarks. Ask abused women of all races about these goldberg remarks:

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/whoopi-defends-stephen-a-smith-if-you-hit-a-man-dont-be-surprised-if-he-hits-back/

Why is she still on the view?

Why is she still on the view? wait the view is a protected show that has Sarah Gilbert on it.

Sarah's on "The Talk", not "The View".

I think they did a really good job dealing with her death and connecting it to Roseanne revival. They kept it light yet respected her death. I look forward to the rest of the series.

To the haters who didn’t watch:

I really don’t have respect for any people that are slamming in already and not even giving it a chance and watching it. You’re the reason why the ratings weren’t as strong as last year’s premiere, and because you didn’t watch it, you really have no excuse to judge it.

You do not know Roseanne at all. She will leave the USA for awhile then return stronger then ever. Most of her fans know she is not racist will continue to support. Gilbert on the other hand will find sucking up gets her no where. When the Connors ends she will just fade into the dark

Sara Gilbert IS the dark. It's hard to believe the cute little girl she was at the start of Roseanne 30 years ago grew up to be such a miserable, vindictive, backstabbing woman.
She's going to sink the show into the ground with her morose character that no one cares about and her PC/SJW crap. She's also executive producer, so when it gets cancelled, it's going to be all on her.

I hope she doesn't quit her day job on The Bawk...because her sitcom career is done after this.

Sara Gilbert IS the dark. It's hard to believe the cute little girl she was at the start of Roseanne 30 years ago grew up to be such a miserable, vindictive, backstabbing woman.
She's going to sink the show into the ground with her morose character that no one cares about and her PC/SJW crap. She's also executive producer, so when it gets cancelled, it's going to be all on her.

I hope she doesn't quit her day job on The Bawk...because her sitcom career is done after this.
Except for The Talk what has Sarah really done since Roseanne left? Not much. She appeared on TBBT but she didn't fit. They were even thinking of making her a full time cast member but that failed. I think she had a short lived sitcom on the WB. In fact John & Laurie are the only ones who had continued acting success after the show ended.

Except for The Talk what has Sarah really done since Roseanne left? Not much. She appeared on TBBT but she didn't fit. They were even thinking of making her a full time cast member but that failed. I think she had a short lived sitcom on the WB. In fact John & Laurie are the only ones who had continued acting success after the show ended.

Sarah Chalke had mild success with "Scrubs" but I don't recall anything with her after that series finished.

John & Laurie are both great actors, and could theoretically carry a show together, just not this one because the gaping hole without Roseanne will always be felt there.

Sara Gilbert was too quick to go on social media condemning Roseanne's infamous tweet, calling it "abhorrent". She could've been mature and stayed silent, but the swiftness of her condemnation of Roseanne showed me her motives and where her loyalties lay.

Sucking up to ABC while throwing the person that gave her the career she enjoys under the bus. Which reinforces your point that she hasn't done much since the original Roseanne and needs to kiss studio butt to keep herself in good graces with them. Otherwise, she'd have to rely on her talent, which she doesn't have.

Sara Gilbert has the acting range of a rock.

I am in total agreement

I will agree with you that Sara Gilbert is not as a strong of an actress as she used to be. I'm not sure what happened, but she doesn't feel like the Darlene we knew back in the original series. This Darlene feels like she's softened a bit but is very quick to make a joke at Becky's expense, for no reason whatsoever. For example, making jokes about her age and sex life.

I also thought the acting from Lecy wasn't good in this episode. She propped up that prescription bottle so quick, it felt like a drug commercial or PSA. And I thought that Becky's joke about the last thing she wanted from Roseanne was the prescription pills that Roseanne took was really done in poor taste. I don't think Becky would actually say that, and it felt like the writers had her say that as a forced way to keep the show light, but for me it didn't work and fell flat.

Another thing I found odd about this episode is the overuse of "granny Rose." From my experience, she was never referred as that way, and it just felt odd.

By the way have you ever condemned Whoppi Goldberg for her remarks. She is known to make off the cut remarks. Ask abused women of all races about these goldberg remarks:

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/whoopi-defends-stephen-a-smith-if-you-hit-a-man-dont-be-surprised-if-he-hits-back/

Why is she still on the view?

Yes, let's change the subject :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Changing the subject? No I am pointing out that when other celebrities make insensitive remarks there is no lynch mob waiting to cut her down. Whoopi Goldberg is known to make off cut remarks. I call this double standard!

By the way have you ever condemned Whoppi Goldberg for her remarks. She is known to make off the cut remarks. Ask abused women of all races about these goldberg remarks:

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/whoopi-defends-stephen-a-smith-if-you-hit-a-man-dont-be-surprised-if-he-hits-back/

Why is she still on the view?

They are absolutely right, if you hit first and get the worst of it later on, that's too bad. This is usually the way it is treated in a court of law. You cannot come in and complain that you were hit, when you threw the first punch. This applies to Males and Females either way. Whoopi went on to say that people should not hit each other period and why ask for trouble in the first place.

tell that to women of all races that come to courts abused. That is a sexist and double standard comment. However Goldberg is not alone in making insensitive comments joy behar made comments like this one: It’s one thing to talk to Jesus. It’s another thing when Jesus talks to you. That’s called mental illness, if I’m not correct, hearing voices.” She later apologized for those comments/ No one gave Roseanne the chance to make amends for her comments. They just fired her. This is a double standard.

tell that to women of all races that come to courts abused. That is a sexist and double standard comment. However Goldberg is not alone in making insensitive comments joy behar made comments like this one: It’s one thing to talk to Jesus. It’s another thing when Jesus talks to you. That’s called mental illness, if I’m not correct, hearing voices.” She later apologized for those comments/ No one gave Roseanne the chance to make amends for her comments. They just fired her. This is a double standard.
They can say whatever they want to with no consequences. Hate goes both ways. Tired of the double standard. I don't watch any current shows and really don't miss them. Watch very few movies either anymore. Let Hollywood sink for all I care.

https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/entertainment/suzanne-somers-thinks-abc-lost-130000046.html

https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/entertainment/suzanne-somers-thinks-abc-lost-130000046.html

1998-2018?

1998-2018?

:confused:

:confused:

At about the 1:00 mark.

At about the 1:00 mark.

Thank you.

ABC's 'The Conners' Scores Five-Year Time Slot High Against The World Series With 7.9M Viewers
Dana Feldman
Contributor
Hollywood & Entertainment

There has been much speculation as to how the Roseanne spinoff, The Conners, would hold up sans its famous matriarch, Roseanne Barr. Episode two, "Tangled Up In Blue," held its own against the start of the World Series with 7.9 million viewers tuning in.

In the episode, Darlene (Sara Gilbert) is in for one surprise after another when David (Johnny Galecki) introduces his girlfriend, Blue (Juliette Lewis), at a parent-teacher conference and mentions that their children will be spending the weekend with them. Dan (John Goodman) hires Becky (Lecy Goranson) to help out at work, but they both come to learn that she might need more help than she can offer. And, Darlene meets a new guy, played by Justin Long.

In its 8:00-8:30 p.m. time slot, The Conners had a 1.7/7 in Adults 18-49 and was a solid holdover against the start of the World Series, which aired on Fox. The Roseanne spinoff dominated its nonsports competition in the half-hour, beating runner-up NBC’s The Voice by 21% (1.7/7 versus 1.4/6). In fact, The Conners was Tuesday's No. 2 TV series with young adults, trailing only NBC’s top-rated This Is Us. The ABC freshman comedy drew an average audience of 7.9 million viewers against the opening of the Fall Classic. In L+3, last week’s debut climbed by +2.3 million viewers and +six-tenths in Adults 18-49 over L+SD.


Last week's premiere episode did well with 10.5 million viewers that tuned in to see how Barr's character had been written out of the show, which was via an accidental opioid overdose. Barr was not happy with the network's decision, but it did spark a conversation about what is an epidemic in this country with more than 115 people in the United States dying per day from opioid overdoses.

The spinoff's pilot episode premiered as TV's No. 1 series debut this season, capturing Adults 18-49 with a 2.3/10, beating out NBC’s The Voice (1.7/7) and This Is Us (2.2/8). And, the premiere episode ranked as ABC’s most-watched comedy series debut in four years and best in three years with Adults 18-49, since September 24, 2014, and September 22, 2015, respectively.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danafeldman/2018/10/24/abcs-the-conners-scores-5-year-time-slot-high-against-the-world-series-with-7-9m-viewers/?fbclid=IwAR3qwiyWf6S7xk-JJLo91t4lLoYAf_j6IlTItbeI96e9vwG6z5vB0gPdicU#3740a42d1b44

This is great news!

This is great news!

I hope the show continues to build its audience.

Agreed!

My mom heard on the Dave & Chuck The Freak radio show (Alt 92.9 in Boston) the other day that The Conners is not doing too good and they only ordered one more episode of the show.

This does not sounds like good news at all.

My mom heard on the Dave & Chuck The Freak radio show (Alt 92.9 in Boston) the other day that The Conners is not doing too good and they only ordered one more episode of the show.

This does not sounds like good news at all.

Its actually doing fine, one of ABC's highest rated shows. Roseanne was always going to be no more than 13 eps this season.

Its actually doing fine, one of ABC's highest rated shows. Roseanne was always going to be no more than 13 eps this season.

So maybe it's just going to be 13 episodes and that's it.

My mom heard on the Dave & Chuck The Freak radio show (Alt 92.9 in Boston) the other day that The Conners is not doing too good and they only ordered one more episode of the show.

This does not sounds like good news at all.

If thats true its very good news!!!!!!

I imagine if the ratings are strong enough, ABC will order more episodes to fill out the season.

Time will tell.

If thats true its very good news!!!!!!

I'll be very surprised if it gets renewed, but won’t be if the show gets cancelled.

The Conners is definitely getting renewed. It's one of ABC's highest rated shows. They only ordered 1 additional episode because Goodman and Metcalf had other commitments.

I don't think it's very funny without Roseanne, but there's no denying the ratings are good.

The Conners is definitely getting renewed. It's one of ABC's highest rated shows. They only ordered 1 additional episode because Goodman and Metcalf had other commitments.

I don't think it's very funny without Roseanne, but there's no denying the ratings are good.

Makes sense as in why they would only add one more episode.

I think its better than seasons 9 or 10 of Roseanne

I really dont see where people get the idea that The Conners is low rated. Maybe compared to Roseanne, but compared to most shows on TV its doing very well. https://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/renewcancel/cancel-bear-vs-abc-week-6-2018-19/

I don't think it's very funny without Roseanne, but there's no denying the ratings are good.

No totally stupid w/o her!!!!


Welcome ashore :)

The Conners' hits a low:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/conners-is-us-tv-ratings-tuesday-nov-13-2018-1161114

The Conners' hits a low:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/conners-is-us-tv-ratings-tuesday-nov-13-2018-1161114

This is great news! It's starting to look like it won't be back for the '19-'20 season. ABC will have egg on it's face, and by then Roseanne's original sitcom will be back in syndication and she'll be laughing all the way to the bank as she rakes in the royalties. (She only gave up rights to "The Connors", but not her original sitcom.)

Yes its excellent news!!

Read again, they were still the highest rated of the night. They’ll be back.

Read again, they were still the highest rated of the night. They’ll be back.

A 1.5 rating is terrible. Especially for a show that pulled in a massive 5.2 premiere last spring with Roseanne in it and never fell below a 2.5 during the entire season. The show without Roseanne has already slipped an entire rating point.

And saying "it's the highest rated of the night" is arguable. According to TV By The Numbers, the highest rated show in viewers was NCIS with a whopping 12.47 million viewers compared to The Conners, 6.94 million. NCIS got almost DOUBLE The Conners viewers!!

In comparison, Roseanne's initial premiers got 18.4 million viewers last spring. The Conners is nearly one THIRD of what Roseanne pulled in. And it's not nearly enough to justify paying $350k an episode to Metcalf and Goodman. The show is bleeding out and the pay cut is a band aid for the time being.

They won't be back, especially if ratings and viewers continue sliding in the coming weeks, and that certainly seems to be the pattern.

And it couldn't have happened to a more deserving show. Karma is a *****!

This is great news! It's starting to look like it won't be back for the '19-'20 season. ABC will have egg on it's face, and by then Roseanne's original sitcom will be back in syndication and she'll be laughing all the way to the bank as she rakes in the royalties. (She only gave up rights to "The Connors", but not her original sitcom.)

I had a great feeling that this show would not even do well at all.

The spin-off did look promising at first, but yes, it’s ratings are sliding and will probably continue to.

ABC is in bad shape and they’re desperate to salvage what they can from Roseanne, so my guess is it will stay, but it may not because I just read that the ABC president was fired for her network falling into last place as far as ratings go. I guess karma really is a biotch.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/channing-dungey-exits-abc-karey-burke-take-as-entertainment-president-1162211

Karma is Roseanne getting fired over her terrible tweet and other problematic stances

Karma is Roseanne getting fired over her terrible tweet and other problematic stances

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

She deserved the boot.

She deserved the boot.

ABC definitely thought so.

Roseanne is Jewish so why was she being anti semetic? Hates being Jewish?

She is?? Hmmm,didnt realise that...........

The Conners has officially been renewed for a second season. Cue the Trump supporter rage. It feels good to prove the haters wrong.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/conners-renewed-season-2-abc-1196341

It just shows how stupid people are for keeping this crappy show going!!


ROSANNE DID NOTHING WRONG!!!!!!!!!

It just shows how stupid people are for keeping this crappy show going!!


ROSANNE DID NOTHING WRONG!!!!!!!!!

Some people think she did.

She opened up her mouth, made a stupid comment and paid a price for it.

It's over and done with. Her supporters need to move on.

Some people think she did.

She opened up her mouth, made a stupid comment and paid a price for it.

It's over and done with. Her supporters need to move on.

props:

props:

;)

;)

Ditto!

It just shows how stupid people are for keeping this crappy show going!!


ROSANNE DID NOTHING WRONG!!!!!!!!!

It’s not a crappy show

I meant to watch this show when it first aired but I forgot about it and now I'm kind of curious about it. I cannot stand Rosanne, period and the fact that I would even consider watching "The Connors" when I never could stand her show says a lot.

It’s not a crappy show

Agree! Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I feel like there’s the extreme Roseanne fans who will not support The Conners no matter how well the cast and writing is and/or won’t give this show the time of day to even watch it, but rather choose to be close minded or fail to accept that that the show has moved on without her.