posted on July 14, 2004 04:53:30 PM new
Slim-Fast Sheds Whoopi Goldberg After Bush Riff
1 hour, 51 minutes ago
Add Entertainment - Reuters to My Yahoo!
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Comedian Whoopi Goldberg (news) will no longer appear in ads for diet aid maker Slim-Fast following her lewd riff on President Bush (news - web sites)'s name at a fund-raiser last week, the company said on Wednesday.
Florida-based Slim-Fast said it was "disappointed" in Goldberg's remarks at last Thursday's $7.5 million star-studded fund-raiser at Radio City Music Hall in New York.
"Ads featuring Ms. Goldberg will no longer be on the air," Slim-Fast General Manager Terry Olson said in a statement, adding that the company regrets that Goldberg's remarks offended some customers.
Republicans have expressed outrage over the fund-raiser for presumptive Democratic nominee John F. Kerry and his vice presidential running mate, John Edwards (news - web sites), in which entertainers lined up to skewer the president.
The New York Post said of Goldberg's appearance at the event: "Waving a bottle of wine, she fired off a stream of vulgar sexual wordplays on Bush's name in a riff about female genitalia."
A spokesperson for Goldberg declined immediate comment.
Slim-Fast is a unit of Anglo-Dutch food-to-detergent group Unilever Plc .
"The natural family is a man and woman bound in a lifelong covenant of marriage for the purposes of:
*the continuation of the human species,
*the rearing of children,
*the regulation of sexuality,
*the provision of mutual support and protection,
*the creation of an altruistic domestic economy, and
*the maintenance of bonds between the generations."
posted on July 14, 2004 06:00:38 PM new
Let me be the first to state that she had the right to say what she what she said. They, however, have the right to dismiss her as a spokesperson if they take umbrage.
posted on July 14, 2004 06:05:00 PM new
I imagine Slim-Fast will lose just as many customers for firing her, if it has lost any at all over the matter.
posted on July 14, 2004 06:47:19 PM new
What exactly did she say? Jokes about Bush/bush? On this great WWW can anybody find a transcript?
She's always been a very outspoken liberal. (Did slim-fast not know that going into contract with her?) Long ago,I saw her one-woman show on broadway before she was really famous and many of the skits said more in comedy than could ever be said in meaningfull words. I really enjoyed that show and I've always liked her.
Must give all the comedians and other spokes-people for products food for thought, though...kinda scary if you cant represent a product and have your own thoughts or political stance.....
posted on July 14, 2004 06:58:03 PM new
She has always impressed me as an extremely intelligent woman. I suspect she figured she'd incur the wrath of Slim Fast for her remarks, and is probably wealthy enough that she doesn't give a crap.
___________________________________
Beware the man of one book.
- Thomas Aquinas
posted on July 14, 2004 06:58:09 PM new
Nobodyseems to be going into detail about what she said, though one site I read said she made jokes that played on Dubya's last name and Cheney's first name.
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on July 14, 2004 07:14:08 PM new
Prof, I suspect that very true, too.
Bunni, maybe we will have to wait for the enquirer or globe to come out! LOL!!!
(its funny but sometimes they do get the real dirt before the other reputable news orgs! ha!)
posted on July 14, 2004 07:43:55 PM new
I don't see a problem.
We have freedom of speech in this country. She is free to say anything she wants. However, she does have to realize that she'll have to face responsibility for her words. Getting fired is one possibility for speaking too freely.
It happens all the time- look at the flak Cheney is getting for his recent foray into free speech
And as prof said, she's so rich, why should she care?
I don't mind the slim-fast commercials, but I'm getting really SICK AND TIRED of hearing about Corta-Slim every 10 seconds on every channel !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--------------------------------------
We do not stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing -- Anonymous
posted on July 14, 2004 08:00:28 PM new
But Dave - I think we can all agree that the most annoying commercial out right now is the one for Oral-B tooth wipes that someone thought would be a good product to market with a dance routine. Argh!
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on July 14, 2004 08:03:47 PM new
No, that commercial is simply a rip-off of an even more annoying one: the Pepto-bismal commercial where they grab various body parts to illustrate what the product works on--and which then evolves into a line dance. I bet the actress doing the diarrhea part of the dance wished she had a better agent..
edited to replace a "u" with an "i"
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
[ edited by bunnicula on Jul 14, 2004 08:04 PM ]
posted on July 14, 2004 08:27:02 PM new
I agree bunni - that one is a lesson in bad taste as well. I bet Staples love the new version of that one where the "dancers" are all red vest wearing employees of an office supply store.
I think it is the "jazz hands" at the end of the Oral-B dance of idiocy that sent me over the edge.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by fenix03 on Jul 14, 2004 08:28 PM ]
posted on July 14, 2004 09:07:46 PM new
I did see a slim-fast ad with whoopie in it tonight.
I think you have freedom of speech but ask George Carlin about it.
The oral-B is a horrible commercial. I saw that for the first time and I am not going to say what I though about it only that it was stupid. I also think a stupid concept.
I am not a TV watcher only 1 1/2 hours in the afternoon, big brother and amazing race so I don't see many commercials.
posted on July 15, 2004 06:17:54 AM new
Hmmm. I've never seen the Oral-B thing. Maybe they don't play that one around here.
But I hear Cortaslim on the radio, and EVERY Channel. I only watch a couple things on TV, and he's always on 2 or three times during a show.
"Come on fatso, between us we're skinny"
YeARGH!! [Best Howard Dean scream impersonation here]
--------------------------------------
We do not stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing -- Anonymous
posted on July 15, 2004 10:46:20 AM new
You libs really are clueless, aren't you. Kerry campaigning on the platform of "Family Values", and when foul mouth "Caryn Elaine Johnson" aka Whoopi?, spouts her crap, he refuses to comment on it other than to say "that every performer ''..conveyed to you the heart and soul of our country.'' He went further and said, ''This campaign will be a celebration of real American values.''
And you wonder why Slim Fast flusher Whoopi?
--------------
Real Democratic Values? Whoopi!
Written by Doc Farmer
Monday, July 12, 2004
There was a bit of a ''do'' last week. You probably didn’t hear about it, though, if you are a slave to the alphabet news. A party, a fundraiser in Radio City Music Hall, to raise some extra money for the Kerry/Edwards campaign. Thursday was the night, and all the stars there just glittered for the paparazzi and the DNC hoi polloi. At least, those with enough dosh to rub shoulders with the high-and-mighty of the lib/dem/soc/commie set. Anti-capitalists at their finest, paying thousands (presumably with non-anti-capitalist earnings) to be entertained by a cavalcade of entertainers.
Well, for those of you who missed it, it was a boffo night for the lib/dem/soc/commies. At the end of the night, presidential-wannabe John Kerry said that every performer ''..conveyed to you the heart and soul of our country.'' He went further and said, ''This campaign will be a celebration of real American values.''
The heart and soul of our country, he said.
Folks, allow me to let you know what the lib/dem/soc/commies feel is the ''heart and soul'' of our country.
It’s Whoopi Goldberg, that famous television and movie-star comedian, coming across a stage with a wine bottle in one hand and a finger pointing toward her ample crotch in the other. She started her show by repeating the oft-said lie about Dubya and a certain blind musician--''Anybody who could wave to Stevie Wonder isn't fully there.'' Of course, that’s completely untrue (see http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/bushwave.htm for evidence) but since when have the lib/dem/soc/commies ever bothered with inconvenient things like the facts? Or honor, decency, and fairness, for that matter....
She went on, comparing the Commander in Chief of all United States Armed Forces to her, um, well, her you know what. Whoopi apparently thought this comparison to be uproariously funny. So, apparently, did Kerry and his trusty sidekick, Edwards. However, Whoopi didn’t stop there. She chided Kerry's youthful ward, Johnny Edwards, and repeatedly called him ''kid'' even though he’s only nine years younger than his potential boss. Now, I wonder why she just didn’t call him ''boy'' and get really into the spirit of the night.
Whoopi also boasted that she hadn’t cleared her material with the DNC (a mere formality, I’m sure), but instead sent them a photocopy of her derrière with a big kiss mark applied.
There were other luminaries (or at least a bunch of dullards whose hatred of Dubya, of America, and of freedom itself, which counts as ''bright'' amongst most lib/dem/soc/commies) who spent the gala evening dissing the president. Sarah Jessica Parker, John Mellencamp, Chevy Chase, John Leguizamo, Paul Newman, Meryl Streep, Jon Bon Jovi, Mary J. Blige, and Wyclef Jean joined in the hate-fest. They all lent their support to the party, helping to raise a whopping $7.5 million. Or, as Teresa Heinz-Kerry might call it, pocket change. This should be of great assistance to the Chiraq/Raffarin ticket – oops, I mean Kerry/Edwards ticket. Same difference, actually....
Now, I object to the content of their speech. I object to the lies, the slanders, the obvious disrespect, even more so in a time of war. However, I also respect their right to speak, despite the fact that it involves such juvenile or hateful crap. Even so, some lib/dem/soc/commies have berated me by saying that I am somehow infringing on the constitutionally protected freedom of speech of these Hollyweird-types. That questioning these Brahmins of Baloney, merely speaking my own mind, is a part of a greater Vast Right Wing Conspiracy to silence dissent, tear up the Constitution, and create a new Fascist State. Considering that Fascism is actually a political construct of the lib/dem/soc/commies, and NOT the rep/cons, I do rather enjoy the irony of their rhetoric.
We are a nation where freedom still reigns supreme. But freedom is not license. One cannot yell ''Fire'' in a crowded movie house (or ''Movie'' in a crowded fire house) because it endangers lives. You can’t threaten the life of the president or vice president because it endangers lives as well as national security. You cannot openly lie or bear false witness against people because it harms reputations and ruins lives. You cannot undermine the nation or provide aid and comfort to an enemy during a time of war, for very obvious reasons (obvious to most, but not all of us, sadly). The lib/dem/soc/commies haven’t done the first or second. However, they have constantly and consistently lied about the president and this administration. Some have provided aid and comfort to the enemy. Those forms of speech are not constitutionally protected. And yet, the lib/dem/soc/commies act as if they are. That the mere objection to their speech itself is an attack on their rights, indeed all rights. It is the height of hubris.
Oddly enough, the lib/dem/soc/commies are being rather tight-lipped about the Bush-Bashing event of Thursday last. The news media have done little if anything to cover the shindig. In fact, it would appear that it did its best to cover up a number of things regarding the show, including the viewpoint of the running mate’s wife. ''A lot of people are going to be angry [at President Bush]--there's a lot to be angry about,'' she told a reporter in New York. ''It's a free country and people are going to express that anger.'' Somehow it would appear that this uncomfortable little viewpoint wasn’t something the DNC wanted vented far and wide. The story, it would appear, was spiked. So much for their own interpretation of ''freedom of speech,'' I suppose.
''Real American Values,'' John Kerry? Real American Values my foot!
Shows just the kind of "family Values" you libs support.
"The natural family is a man and woman bound in a lifelong covenant of marriage for the purposes of:
*the continuation of the human species,
*the rearing of children,
*the regulation of sexuality,
*the provision of mutual support and protection,
*the creation of an altruistic domestic economy, and
*the maintenance of bonds between the generations."
[ edited by Bear1949 on Jul 15, 2004 10:54 AM ]
posted on July 15, 2004 11:37:27 AM new
Kerry's platform is not mainly based on "family values",whatever the helI THAT means....he's running on a platform of the economy, stupid, creating jobs, ....solving the problems bushy created in Iraq, saving the environment for future generation, education for EVERYONE and so forth!
Again, if what Whoopee goldberg says, Kerry's hair and speech delivery are the best the Kerry-haters can come up with ..they ARE desperate!
posted on July 15, 2004 11:54:47 AM new
Bear, your cut/paste above was written by someone who apparently lumps any and all who are either pro-Kerry or anti-Bush into the big group he calls the lib/dem/soc/commie set. How anyone could take the words of such a simpleton seriously is beyond me.
___________________________________
Beware the man of one book.
- Thomas Aquinas
posted on July 15, 2004 12:05:25 PM new
To be a comedian doesn't mean that they have to use corrupt language, do jesters etc just to prove that they are funny. There are many ways to make jokes, ethnic or otherwise, but to use hand and finger jestures, talk filthy and show or point to body parts are not american family values. They are the values of the sick comedians and that includes the audiences that watch it. When she did that everyone should have left. Buy then it is my opinion and I imagine not the opinion of the majority of this board.
posted on July 15, 2004 12:10:19 PM newTo be a comedian doesn't mean that they have to use corrupt language, do jesters etc just to prove that they are funny.
The comedian decides whether to be "blue"or not when being funny.
They are the values of the sick comedians and that includes the audiences that watch it. When she did that everyone should have left
Nothing sick about her comedy.
What is really sick is supporting a man who lied about the Iraq war and has gotten over 800 Americans killed and thousands wounded.
posted on July 15, 2004 03:42:31 PM new
Can you people "READ"? Heir Kerry said He went further and said, ''This campaign will be a celebration of real American values.''
And in saying that & not denouncing the crap whoopi cushion spewed, he has approved of her values. But then I forget I'm talking to the same people ? that excused clinton for lowering the values of the White House.
____________________
As for your tired old tyrade of Bush lied.
'Bush lied' and the lying liars who perpetuate it
Jonah Goldberg
Sen. Ted Kennedy gave another one of his angry speeches this week. With all the gravitas he could muster, he recycled his standard complaint: that the Iraq war was never really about WMDs or the war on terror. It was a "political product" from "Day 1" of the president's administration.
This echoes Kennedy's earlier diatribes, like last fall when he said, "Before the war, week after week after week after week, we were told lie after lie after lie after lie."
Personally, I think Kennedy's an embarrassment to his party. But that doesn't change the fact that he's taken seriously or that he speaks for a large constituency. So let's try to deal with the "Kennedy School's" view of the Iraq war.
First let me admit that I think the failure to find significant evidence of weapons of mass destruction easily constitutes one of the greatest intelligence blunders since Pearl Harbor. There's still a chance we'll find something. But if we do, it will probably be too little, too late to change this basic assessment.
Critics of the Bush Administration are probably cheering, "Finally! Goldberg's stopped drinking the White House's Kool-Aid!"
But hold on. To argue that this was a huge intelligence blunder is to largely let George Bush off the hook for the even-more-popular Bush critique: that he lied to the American people about Iraq.
For Bush to have lied, he had to have known that there were no WMDs, right? It's not a lie unless you know the truth. If you say something you think is true that later turns out to be false, we don't call that a "lie," we call that a "mistake."
You could look it up.
This vital distinction seems to be lost on many smart people. For example, the online magazine Slate has been hosting an interesting discussion among the most respected and prominent liberals who supported the Iraq war. The question before them, more or less, is whether they regret it. Some do. Some don't. Most hold positions awash in shades of gray.
One of those is Kenneth Pollack, the former Clinton NSC staffer and author of the hugely influential book, "The Threatening Storm." Pollack's book was the most coherent and sustained case for the war from any quarter. Slate's round-robin is timed to coincide with a must-read cover story in the current issue of The Atlantic in which Pollack tries to figure out where he - and we - went wrong on WMDs.
Anyway, Pollack tells Slate, "If I had to write 'The Threatening Storm' over again I certainly would not have been so unequivocal that war was going to be a necessity."
In response, George Packer, a prominent liberal hawk, says, "Ken Pollack should be congratulated: How many leading voices on this issue have subjected themselves to such honest criticism? What he got wrong he got wrong because the intelligence was mistaken. What the administration got wrong it got wrong because it didn't care about the intelligence."
This encapsulates pretty much everything that's wrong with even the White House's most respected critics: a nearly total inability to consider the possibility that this administration operated in good faith.
Packer says Pollack's mistake was based on the best intelligence available; however, Bush & Co are a bunch of bloodthirsty ideologues or greedy liars or both.
Unfortunately, there are too many anti-Bush slanders out there to count, let alone debunk, but they are all premised on the "fact" that Bush lied.
But nobody has made a remotely persuasive case that Bush lied. The German, Russian, French, Israeli, British, Chinese and U.S. governments all agreed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. The German assessment was even more dire than our own. They were convinced Saddam would have a nuclear weapon by 2005.
Bill Clinton and his entire administration believed Saddam had WMDs. In 2002 Robert Einhorn, Clinton's point man on WMDs, testified to Congress, "Today, or at most within a few months, Iraq could launch missile attacks with chemical or biological weapons against its neighbors" including our 100,000 troops in Saudi Arabia.
The threat - chemical, biological and nuclear - against U.S. territory proper was only a few years away, according to Einhorn. Dick Gephardt, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, Wesley Clark, Joe Lieberman, Tony Blair, Hillary Clinton, Jacques Chirac, Gerhard Schroeder: all of these people believed Iraq had major stockpiles of WMDs.
Were they all "liars" like President Bush? No? Why not?
You can't have it both ways. You can't say Bush lied while others who said the same thing were being honest. The White House was operating with fundamentally identical information to that of Clinton, Pollack and Einhorn. What was different was that this White House needed to deal with the post-9/11 world.
Maybe that clouded Bush's judgment - or opened his eyes. Let's have that argument. I certainly believe mistakes were made (though I still believe the war was right and just). But if you start from Kennedy's premise that the WMD thing was made up, I can't take you seriously
"The natural family is a man and woman bound in a lifelong covenant of marriage for the purposes of:
*the continuation of the human species,
*the rearing of children,
*the regulation of sexuality,
*the provision of mutual support and protection,
*the creation of an altruistic domestic economy, and
*the maintenance of bonds between the generations."
posted on July 15, 2004 06:57:48 PM new
why arent the republicans getting upset or causing a flak about dennis miller calling kerry/edwards gay, etc. in fun?
or rather, why arent the liberals getting upset about it?
posted on July 15, 2004 07:42:40 PM new why arent the republicans getting upset or causing a flak about dennis miller calling kerry/edwards gay, etc. in fun? or rather, why arent the liberals getting upset about it?
Because its true?
Look at all the hand holding, knee slapping, hugging & kissing Kerry & Edwards are practicing on each other.
"The natural family is a man and woman bound in a lifelong covenant of marriage for the purposes of:
*the continuation of the human species,
*the rearing of children,
*the regulation of sexuality,
*the provision of mutual support and protection,
*the creation of an altruistic domestic economy, and
*the maintenance of bonds between the generations."
posted on July 15, 2004 10:10:18 PM newwhy arent the liberals getting upset
Most likely because they know that such spew is thrown about all the time by neo-cons when they have nothing concrete to say. It's like white noise--it means nothing, so your mind filters it out.
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
