Top of the Ticket

Political commentary from Andrew Malcolm

« Previous Post | Top of the Ticket Home | Next Post »

Obama-backer Oprah says no Sarah Palin on her TV show

Oprah Winfrey, the billionaire TV talk-show diva who is supporting the Democratic presidential nominee, says she will Oprah Winfrey supports Barack Obama for the presidency and campaigned for him but now prohibits the Republican female vice president Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska from being on her widely-watched TV shownot allow the Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin on her daily show, which is widely viewed by women.

The 44-year-old Palin is the first female nominee on a Republican presidential ticket in the party's 164-year history, though she is little-known outside Alaska, where she was elected a reform governor in 2006.

Palin, a former high school basketball star and beauty pageant contestant, is the mother of five, an outdoorswoman and part owner in her husband Todd's commercial fishing business.

This past year Oprah endorsed Barack Obama for president. It was the first time she bAlaska Governor Sarah Palin the first female on a national Republican Party ticket in historyecame publicly involved in politics.

Oprah emceed numerous rallies for the freshman Democrat senator in key caucus and primary states, drawing large crowds, donations, media coverage and many new volunteers. She also hosted a lucrative fundraiser at one of her homes, near Santa Barbara. But she has so many we can't count 'em.

Oprah's political involvement, as noted previously by...

...The Ticket, hurt her in TV ratings, though she remains clearly the most-watched such show.

Many commentors on Ticket items expressed resentment that Winfrey, who made her fortune off appealing to women, would desert the first serious female candidate to vie for her party's nomination, Hillary Clinton, another Democrat, in favor of a male candidate, Obama. She also did not have Clinton on her program during the campaign.

TMZ, the widely-read celebrity website, asked Winfrey about having Palin on her program to describe her life and views to other American women.

In a post earlier today, TMZ said Winfrey replied, "There has been absolutely no discussion about having Sarah Palin on my show."

According to TMZ, Winfrey also said: "At the beginning of this presidential campaign when I decided that I was going to take my first public stance in support of a candidate, I made the decision not to use my show as a platform for any of the candidates."

Winfrey also said she would "love" to have the Republican candidate on her show, but only after the Nov. 4 election, which pits the Illinois Democrat Obama against Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain.

Winfrey has had Obama on her program two previous times, in January 2005 and again in the fall of 2006 shortly before he announced his presidential candidacy.

What do Ticket readers think? Is this fair? Would you watch an Oprah show with Palin and/or Obama? Do you still watch Oprah's program in the first place?

-- Andrew Malcolm

Photo credits: Associated Press

Hey, all you new Ticket readers, to get news alerts like this and all the regular Ticket items all day and night sent directly to to your cell, go here and click Follow for free. (Veteran Ticket readers also welcome, of course.)

Comments () | Archives (569)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Thank you Miss Wallace,

I appreciate the comment. One thing, sometimes, trying makes one appreciate the effort. I will pray, and hope, but, agreeing to disagree is better than not allowing anyone discussion.

To Joan Grant, I am sorry to hear about your displeasure and disappointment in what you perceive happened with Oprah during this election.

May I allow you as a Black person and speaking only for myself and not a race another viewpoint.

You heard talk of slavery and issues that you cannot relate to in this day and time. That's good. Because you are not exposed to the hatred and the attitude of superiority that was reflected in those times.

You have never had to contend with wondering if you would be accepted based on your sex or, your race. You never had to deal with the frustration as the women in an earlier century, that they were not allowed to vote. Women were not allowed own property (they had to get permission) and, they were not allowed on their own to have a check or savings account.

You wake up in the morning and can get in your car and drive yourself to work. You can get a paycheck, deposit it in your checking account and pay your own bills. You even can have your own condo and/or house if you choose.

Sadly, there are many today, that still aren't given those privileges. A woman is not allowed to drive in several Muslim countries. A woman must be chaperoned by a man at all times when out and about.

Women can be stoned to death for being raped or considered to have been in an adulterous relationship. The man is not punnished, but the woman is.

Many women have been raped and killed for defying what orthodox Muslim teachings such as being out without the correct dress, or simply going to school.

Could those men in those countries presently ever imagine or consider thinking a woman could be put into a powerful position such as prime minister or president above them? No.

Obama is given the opportunity to hold the highest office in the country. As a minority, there is was an under current that went through the country, you can earn millions, you can go through education through the highest levels, but you can't ever be 'good' enough or allowed to command the respect to run the highest level of government.

For the first time in its history, the United States population has given a man of color the opportunity to run the nation. It was a major barrier for those who did not fit the stereotypical image of a president an opportunity to hold the highest office. Whether he succeeds or fails has yet to be determined. He already has changed the barrier that he is given to chance to fail and succeed as Nixon was.

You yourself, may never have found yourself threatened or intimidated because you wanted to do your duty and vote, but many have. Look up 'bloody Tuesday'. Both White and Black people were killed during the civil rights movement. It was White and Black people that made the change.

Slavery caused a major attitude swing for many people. Whites then had a superiority complex that only they were entitled. American Indians learned as well as the Chinese about that pervasive attitude. It's not just 'black' people, but minorities that had to contend with this negative and enduring concept. It took women over a century to be able to vote. They were not allowed to hold land nor money.

You are able to voice your opinion on this post, a century ago, you could not.

As I stated before "Why do you think it's 'colored' only used on the signs that were posted in the south? It's because the racists needed to keep all those that were not 'pure' away from the bloodline."

This despite the fact that many KKK and other racists probably did have Negro girlfriends/mistresses and as a result, also had illegitimate children. (Hint, look at the famous long term Southern congressman known to be insensitive to race issues that fathered a black daughter.) Their motive of keeping the ‘colored’ at a separation was to ensure all non-whites were kept at bay to maintain the majority and superiority.

What you see is a Black inclusive situation, no, it means all minorities, women, creeds can go as far as they can without worry of being told we can't.

It took the majority, not, the minority to elect Obama. Whites, women, Jewish, Catholic, educated, un-educated to elect him. Why, because people were tired.

Many are losing homes, jobs, and worried they may never be able to recover.

I don't know why Oprah did what she did, I'm not her, but I can tell you why she was proud. The inauguration will be on the steps of the Capitol in Washington DC. The very steps and structure, that slaves were 'forced' to build. That slaves were unable to have access to and enter.

On those very steps, will be a Black man standing there taking the oath of office. If it didn't affect you as a American citizen, then, it should as a women. Because 50 years ago very few women held positions of power, and 100 years ago you might not be allowed to have gone.

It's not being Black that is the issue here, it's the opportunity to be viewed on the person's credentials. The 'front' door has been opened and we are allowed in without begging or pleading.

To Maryann,

I take it you have not watched many of Oprah's shows, why? Because she has had discussions about people's perceptions of race. For example, she had one lady who is 'White' that looked 'Black'. Her hair was thick and coarse and her features looked 'negroid', yet was White.

Repeatedly, she had on a woman who was fair-skinned with natural blond hair and green eyes that was, 'black'. Her parents were Black and her grandparents were Black. If you study genetics, you would see somewhere down the line there was a White person or persons in the lineage and the genes connected to produce her.

As for the 'White' side of the family, you did see it. His grandparents, especially his grandmother and his mother. He wrote a book and discussed it publicly.

Now, ask a question, why didn't we see all of McCain's family? Like, his brother? I dunno, after the phone call he made to 911 operators and shouted and screamed at them, and, the remarks he made about visiting certain counties in VA that he called communist, the campaign kinda kept him at bay. (Oh, he wrote apologetic letters to the respective parties afterwards.)

If Oprah had Sarah Palin on her show, based on the limited interviews she had that cultivated up to the infamous Couric interview, do you think it would have really helped her, or hurt her?

I mean, in that, if she wasn't prepared for the Couric interview, how do you think she would have fared with Oprah? If she had been the same and displayed the same weaknesses as she had in the Couric interview, she could have really gone down.

Since Oprah has a huge following, it could have really affected her popularity if she tanked on that show more than the Couric interview. Why do you think the McCain campaign didn't push it? They could have easily made it into a big thing, but they slowly let it die down. Think about that.

If Palin had done well, she couldn't find herself talking about terrorists and Ayers after could she? Oprah could have easily talked about her like a dog inferring it was an insult to be on her show and then talk in such a way it drew racists remarks.

Either way, it was not a win-win situation for Palin. It would have gotten her the attention, but less towards McCain and the campaign. That in itself possibly would have made her to be more of the draw than the president-elect. Making her the celebrity and caused more infighting in campaign having her get more noticed than him.

Just for those that don't understand being persecuted and kept down. This didn't happen 200 years ago, it happend at the beginning of this month. "

From: Story from BBC NEWS:

"Stoning victim 'begged for mercy'
A young woman recently stoned to death in Somalia first pleaded for her life, a witness has told the BBC.

"Don't kill me, don't kill me," she said, according to the man who wanted to remain anonymous. A few minutes later, more than 50 men threw stones.

Human rights group Amnesty International says the victim was a 13-year-old girl who had been raped.

Initial reports had said she was a 23-year-old woman who had confessed to adultery before a Sharia court.

Numerous eye-witnesses say she was forced into a hole, buried up to her neck then pelted with stones until she died in front of more than 1,000 people last week.

Meanwhile, Islamists in the capital, Mogadishu have carried out a public flogging.

Mogadishu is nominally under the control of government forces and their Ethiopian allies, who face frequent attacks by Islamist and nationalist insurgents.
The BBC's Mohammed Olad Hassan in the city says the flogging was a show of strength.

He says two men accused of helping to kill a man and torture his mother, who they accused of theft, were each given 39 lashes in the north-eastern suburb of Suqa-hola.

The man who actually killed the alleged thief was released, after agreeing to pay his family 100 camels in compensation.

Before the flogging, hundreds of Islamist fighters performed a military parade, our reporter says.

Death threats
Cameras were banned from the stoning in Kismayo, but print and radio journalists who were allowed to attend estimated that the woman, Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow, was 23 years old.

People were saying this was not good for Sharia law, this was not good for human rights, this was not good for anything

However, Amnesty said it had learned she was 13, and that her father had said she was raped by three men.
When the family tried to report the rape, the girl was accused of adultery and detained, Amnesty said.

Convicting a girl of 13 for adultery would be illegal under Islamic law.

A human rights activist in the town told the BBC on condition of anonymity that he had received death threats from the Islamic militia, who accuse him of spreading false information about the incident.

He denies having anything to with Amnesty's report.

Court authorities have said the woman came to them admitting her guilt.

She was asked several times to review her confession but she stressed that she wanted Sharia law and the deserved punishment to apply, they said.

But a witness who spoke to the BBC's Today programme said she had been crying and had to be forced into a hole before the stoning, reported to have taken place in a football stadium.

"More than 1,000 people arrived there," he said.

"After two hours, the Islamic administration in Kismayo brought the lady to the place and when she came out she said: 'What do you want from me?'"

"They said: 'We will do what Allah has instructed us'. She said: 'I'm not going, I'm not going. Don't kill me, don't kill me.'

"A few minutes later more than 50 men tried to stone her."

'Checked by nurses'
The witness said people crowding round to see the execution said it was "awful".

"People were saying this was not good for Sharia law, this was not good for human rights, this was not good for anything."

But no-one tried to stop the Islamist officials, who were armed, the witness said. He said one boy was shot in the confusion.

According to Amnesty International, nurses were sent to check during the stoning whether the victim was still alive. They removed her from the ground and declared that she was, before she was replaced so the stoning could continue.

The port of Kismayo was seized in August by a coalition of forces loyal to rebel leader Hassan Turki, and al-Shabab, the country's main radical Islamist insurgent organisation.

Mr Turki is on the US list of "financers of terrorism".

It was the first reported execution by stoning in the southern port city since Islamist insurgents captured it.

The BBC had a reporter in the area, but he was shot dead in Kismayo in June."


Sarah Palin should not go on the Oprah Winfrey Show. It would be an insult if she did because we know that Oprah doesn't care for her and the pre-election and election stuff is over with and people have already voted. Obama won and is our newest president and that is exciting and hopeful. He had her support and many other American citizens of the United States. Not just Oprah's influence (some, yes!) as the lame media makes it out to be. I believe that people should be fair and have an equal chance and Oprah wasn't when it came to Sarah Palin and having her on the daily talk show. That is why Oprah is being called when reading the comments posted a hypocrite and racist. Is she both and should a CNN poll be taken?

I believe that Sarah Palin was paid to use her image to delibrately loose this election. It was something airy about McCains conduct during the whole debate it was as if he was giving the position up willingly. It had nothing to do with Sarah Palin, she was briefed improperly to make the republican party look bad.And now everyone is at her neck but really she was not to put her best foot forward she was paid to make herself look like an air head.Hey wonder why. Take a look at alex jones and Sarah Palin youtube

I don't remember since I have not watched Oprah on a consistent basis at the time of past elections if she ever had candidates on the show during primaries and/or full campaigns. So, I can't say she is contradicting her actions.

But, and only but, if she personally feels strongly for a candidate, that means she recognizes she may not be able to objective and allow the candidates to 'shine' and yes, endorse their perspectives.

Why do you think many want to get on Oprah? Her influence and approval can mean a greater audience and yes, interest in the product. Her book clubs are known to bring in a wider audience for the author.

Oprah was attempting to keep herself impartial by NOT allowing ANY candidates on the show during the run of the campaign. Personally, outside of her show she supported Obama. That is a wise decision, but many think she should have been hypocritical and allowed everyone on the show. Why?

To influence her viewers against people she didn't have a conviction to support? It is one thing to hold values and still try to do something for knowledge, it's another, that the presence can give the wrong notion or opinion for what you stand for.

Many of you may not remember, or have watched the show in its early days. During that time, Oprah had on hate group members. She was not endorsing their opinions but had them on to learn about their thinking. Now, many in the audience didn't become racists from watching the show. She was trying to give the respect to the guest, but it was hard firmly against their convictions and beliefs.

In this situation, it wasn't worth the aggravation I think if I was her. Darn if she does, and darned if she doesn't. She knew very well, that she would be criticized extensively and used as a way to gain publicity wrongly by being criticized by her words, questions, looks, and whatever could be miscontrued by that party's campaign or, viewers. Nothing she said or do could be viewed as impartial knowing she was for a candidate already.

She would be attacked even though she tried to be objective. So, to be the most objective and impartial is to keep her business out of it, and show support as an individual which, she did. As an American citizen, she is entitled to speak freely and do within the law what she feels she is capable of doing, volunteering time and money to support a cause. She did not use her show as a podium.

I will never watch Oprah again... this was totally about race and she showed herself as a racist from the begining to the end of this election. She supported a man who had a total of 92 days as a senator, what made him soooo great! He is not ready to lead our country. In addition, his history is very scary. he will not even produce a copy of his birth certificate. This is sooo Jim Jones, I will be glad when you idiots drink your
kool-aid. As far as Oprah goes, she will be judged for leading people down that path! I am on a mission to boycott Oprah and Martha Stewart. Join me!

I used to really love Oprah, but the day you denounced God as our creator on her show, she lost me forever.

I will never understand why people say they are scared of Sarah Palin. Here we have voted in now a President of Muslin descent, with past friends who hate this country.

With the secruity worries we have now in this country and we put someone over us that has that past??? Now, that is something to be scared of.

All his fancy speeches are just that......fancy speeches that just make people feel sooooo good. Only time will tell who he really is, and we can only hope it doesn't cost our country tragedy before we find it out.

Concerning the race issue in the election.......

If anyone did not vote for Obama because he was Black is racist, but...........if YOU voted for him because he is Black (such as Oprah), that makes you a racist too!!!

It's the same thing, only reverse!

For all those people saying it's unfair Oprah didn't have Palin on the show:

Oprah has had Obama as a guest twice -- in January 2005 and October 2006. Both occasions were BEFORE the Illinois senator officially announced he was running for the White House.

According to Oprah: "At the beginning of this presidential campaign, when I decided that I was going to take my first public stance in support of a candidate, I made the decision NOT to use my show as a platform for ANY of the candidates."

It's so funny how some of white america can disapprove a black person voting for another black person and call it racism.WOW! Please ask yourself if you know anything about the history of america. It's clear some of you still remain ignorant to what has happened. Maybe we should call you racist because after all this time, it took until this very moment in time for another minority to be commander and chief. You're calling the wrong people racist. We are not a racist people, we are a people trying to work together and right a wrong! Thank you Jesus! It has nothing to do with votes if you think about it! It's just our time. I finally feel like I count(as an american) in a political sense. Stop the hatred. You now have a black leader, we accepted the fact that we had a white leader term after term after term...........

Oprah knows when to get the news. Not everyone is for SALE. I really hope Mrs. Palin doesn't go to her show. She lied after she said she wasn't supporting our President Elect Barack Hussein Obama. Now she wants to see and speak to Oprah.

I wonder the REAL reason why Ms. Oprah didn't want to interview Mrs. Palin???

Why NOW??

What's going on?

Did someone said something to Ms. Oprah that she felt that it wasn't the time to have Mrs. Palin in her show?

Could someone be truthful this time and and for ALL?

I've always felt that Oprah favored the african american community over all else. My mother used to watch her program, and I frequently pointed out how openly "extra-supportive" she was towards minorities, especially the black community. I think Oprah is racist. Seems as if she would be a bit more supportive of all people, no matter what ethnic background they have, considering she has countless stories of her own about being the victim ignorance.

I do not watch Oprah because she may fool some people but not those of us who can and do read between the lines.
Gov. Sarah Palin is outstanding and she will win the leection is 2012 if she does run. I will support her and her campaign financially, politically and be a tireless supporter of a real PRESIDENT!!!


Oprah ! Spiritual ! Doesn't compute. Enjoying sexual contact without marriage, she's a iiar to anything spiritual.

I would like to go on the record officially in opposition of Media endorsements, celebrirty endorsements, and corporate involvement in the American Election process. The involvement, endorsements and corporate interference in elections at any level distorts the elction itself and noy only diminishes the vote, but abridges it as well. Congress needs to return elctions to the voters by rebuffing media endorsments and eliminating corporate involvement. The value of a celebrities time talent and trasure should be considered a campaign contribution and subject to federal campaign laws.

yes I would watch the show just to see her finish making a complete idiot out of her self. she is riding on a dieing republican party. that if they were smart would distant their party far away from her as they can get she is a loose train heading for a track with no rails.

« | 1 2 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12


Recommended on Facebook


In Case You Missed It...

About the Columnist
A veteran foreign and national correspondent, Andrew Malcolm has served on the L.A. Times Editorial Board and was a Pulitzer finalist in 2004. He is the author of 10 nonfiction books and father of four. Read more.
President Obama
Republican Politics
Democratic Politics



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: