Roman Around

combating liberalism and other childish notions

Archive for the ‘Television’ Category


Posted by Andrew Roman on June 15, 2010

In an age where multiculturalism is almost a moral imperative – where love and appreciation of country have been tossed aside in favor of building self-esteem, celebrating diversity and saving the planet from everything – patriotism, as a selling tool, is appallingly atypical. Good old fashioned, everyday, love-your-country, bread-and-butter, show-it-proudly patriotism seems to be the exception, not the rule – so much so that when it is employed in an advertising campaign, conservatives take special notice.

(Yes, we “old-fashioned” Constitution-loving, free-market, pro-second-amendment God-fearing types still tend to be moved by such things as waving flags, a military band and George Washington).

At the great Lady Cincinnatus blog (brought to my attention by Proof Positive), there is post called “Commercial of The Year.” It is an ad for the 2010 Dodge Challenger.

It is a must see.

A thought crossed my mind as I watched this spot for the third time.

How many of us can remember when military heroes – recipients of medals, citations, etc – routinely earned space on our hometown newspapers’ front page? It was automatic that those who were recognized for meritorious service while defending the nation would be afforded above-the-fold, page one status.

It was a given.

Recently, I had the opportunity to “rescue” a whole bunch of yellowing Toledo Blade newspapers from the World War II era. (They were being used as insulation in an old farm house owned by my wife’s family). The number of front page stories about local boys who earned various honors on the battlefield were simply too many to count.

What a different time it was.

Today, one is hard pressed to find such recognition except, perhaps, in some very small town publications and local neighborhood papers.

There are many great blogs, however, that pick up the slack.

Thank God for them.

Watching this commercial made me think how, at one time, there was no higher honor – nothing that garnered the respect and admiration from the public at large – than serving in the United States military.

A nation that does not honor and revere its warriors cannot – and does not deserve to – endure.

(Serious stuff just from watching a car ad, eh?)

Now, I’m off to go look at Dodge Challenger.


Posted in patriotism, Television | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »


Posted by Andrew Roman on May 27, 2010


Posted in Television | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »


Posted by Andrew Roman on February 8, 2010

Dennis Prager

I was fortunate enough to get a quick mention on Dennis Prager’s radio show earlier today by name, not because of this blog or anything, but because I found myself doing something I wouldn’t normally do – namely, correcting something the host said.

Admittedly, I felt funny doing it, seeing as I admire Dennis very much. My intent was not to show him up or get the better of him by any means

He was simply wrong on a point he was making and I felt it needed correcting in order for the point to be more effective.

Besides, he welcomes corrections.

They don’t occur very often, but when they do, he embraces them, you might say.

I couldn’t get through on the phone, so I e-mailed the show toward the end of the first hour. Much to my delight, Dennis came out of a commercial break during the second hour and announced my correction to an assertion he made regarding last night’s Focus On The Family Super Bowl commercial featuring Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow, and his mother, Pam.

Before it ever hit TV screens across America, the spot caused a much-publicized uuproar among many pro-abortionists for what was anticipated to be an “in your face” pro-life message. Based on how controversial the ad was supposed to be, Dennis was among those on the right who felt the ad shouldn’t air. His position raised more than a few eyebrows among his conservative brethren.

After all, why would any conservative not want to see an ad on television that advocated for a genuine conservative value – namely, the right to life? In a world where the mainstream media is so obviously slanted left, one would think that such a thing would garner unanimity among conservatives.

Not so.

Leading up to the Super Bowl, Prager made it very clear that he personally supported the pro-life position. He had no problem with the Focus On The Family message in and of itself, but his reservations were rooted in his displeasure of having advocacy ads airing during the Super Bowl – or any other sporting event, for that matter. He felt that allowing one controversial, issues-based ad to air would open the door to a slew of politically-charged commercials, which would eventually devolve into an all-out political ad war. The Super Bowl, he argued, was no place for that kind of sparring. In a nation already rife with political discontent, there should be some venues, he argued, free from such things.

It’s a fair argument.

Of course, as it turned out, the ad was neither controversial nor political in any way. In fact, after seeing it twice, as Dennis explained today,  unless a viewer specifically knew what Focus On The Family was all about, he or she would be hard pressed to attach any political position whatsoever to the spot. On its face, it was about a Mom loving his Son, sponsored by some family oriented organization. While Dennis continued to maintain that advocacy spots should not be aired during broadcasts like the Super Bowl, Dennis conceded that the Tim Tebow spot did not fall into that category.

Pam and Tim Tebow

Where Dennis made his mistake was in his description of the commercial’s ending for his audience. According to him, the commercial’s final scene, although very brief, gave away the fact that it was, indeed, a pro-life ad  – not because the Focus On The Family web address came on screen, but because the phrase “pro life” appeared in the closing graphic. Dennis argued that if not for that, it would have been impossible to know what the ad was advocating, other than Mom and Son love eachother.

He went on to say that even with the short appearance of the words “pro life” at the end, the commercial was not the kind of issues-oriented ad he spoke out against prior to the Super Bowl.

He ultimately had no problem with the commercial.

Dennis got into a debate with one caller who claimed the commercial was clearly an advocacy ad precisely because the Focus On The Family web address was shown. According to the caller, that alone made it an issues-based spot because all one would need to do is go to the website and see that the organization is, in fact, a pro life organization (among other things). Dennis challenged the caller, saying that no one could possibly know that it was an anti-abortion commercial by its contents – except for the final graphic featuring the words “pro life.”

The problem with Prager’s otherwise effective argument is that the words “pro life” do not appear anywhere  in the ad – not even at the end, as he stated.


There isn’t a hint of anti-abortion to be found in that spot – and that’s where I felt Dennis needed to be corrected.

His argument was worth hearing – and it was a good one – but for the sake of clarity (Dennis’ best friend), the facts needed to be sound.

On its content, the ad was as much an anti-abortion spot as it was an anti-tofu burger spot.

What actually does appear at the end of the ad are the thoroughly innocuous and inoffensive phrases “celebrate family” and “celebrate life” – and who, in their right mind, could argue with those sentiments?

Not even leftists. (I think).

The Tim Tebow spot was as antispeptic and non-controversial as a commercial could be.

Unless one is ready to make the claim that Life cereal is an anti-abortion breakfast food or that Milton Bradley’s “Game Of Life” is a disguised effort to undermine Planned Parenthood, the most talked-about Super Bowl commercial turned out to be the most wholesome one of them all.


wordpress statistics

Posted in abortion, Television, Values | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »


Posted by Andrew Roman on February 8, 2010

So, let me see if I got this straight…

All the controversy was over that?

That’s what all the rowdydow was about?

The much talked-about, hotly-debated, hyper-contentious Super Bowl ad featuring 2007 Heisman Trophy winner, Tim Tebow, that had pro-abortionists across the map frothing at the mouth did not contain the word “abortion.” It did not use the phrases “right to life” or “pro life.” Tim’s mom, Pam, who was the main focus of the ad, never talked about her decision to avoid terminating her pregnancy, never mentioned making the choice to “keep her baby,” and never even used the word “life.” In fact, this wonderfully sentimental, but thoroughly benign ad, couldn’t have been less controversial if it had to be. The only indication at all that this ad had anything to do with the “pro life” movement was when the final screen featuring the words “Focus On the – Celebrate family. Celebrate life.” appear.

That’s it.

Here is the exact text of the ad:

Mrs. Tebow: I call him my miracle baby. He almost didn’t make it into this world. I can remember so many times when I almost lost him. It was so hard. Well he’s all grown up now, and I still worry about his health. You know, with all our family’s been through, you have to be tough.

(Tim comes roaring in and “tackles” his Mom. Mom quickly pops back up).

Mrs. Tebow: Timmy, I’m trying to tell our story here.

Tim: Sorry about that, Mom.

(Focus On the Family Screen pops up).

Tim: “You still worry about me, Mom?”

Mrs. Tebow: “Well, yeah. You’re not nearly as tough as I am).

This is what the national panty-twisting was all about? Are you kidding me? Bugs Bunny wearing a bra to disguise himself from Elmer Fudd was more controversial than this.

See for yourself (if you haven’t already):

How shall America recover from this?

wordpress statistics

Posted in abortion, Pop Culture, Sports, Television | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »


Posted by Andrew Roman on February 3, 2010

Scott Brown was not elected to the Senate because of health care. It was, as Howard Dean put it, a message being sent to Democrats that they were not being leftist enough on the issue.

You probably didn’t know that.

Collapsing poll numbers and recent Democrat election losses are no indication whatsoever that Americans are rejecting modern liberalism. Rather, it’s simply a matter of intolerant, obstructionist right-wingers spoiling the messianic transformation with their assorted variety of “isms” and “phobes.”

Were you aware of that?

You were probably also unaware that the steadily decreasing viewership of Keith Olbermann’s MSNBC Countdown program has nothing to do with his intellectually putrid, angry-middle-aged, over-the-top, lying-sack-of-crap approach to political commentary.

It’s true.

His disappearing ratings are completely unrelated to his tired, ill-informed, painully tedious, hard-left daily tantrums.

It is not because he hosts a very bad television program that people don’t want to watch.

Instead, it can be blamed on the new cycle.

The boss at MSNBC says so.

Jeff Bercovici at the Daily Finance writes:

Ratings for Olbermann’s Countdown have been soft recently, and the 8 p.m. shows on CNN and HLN have narrowed the gap. In the important demographic of adults 25 to 54 — the group advertisers are looking to reach — Countdown was down 44% year-over-year in January. It averaged 268,000 viewers in that demo, only 3,000 more than Nancy Grace’s show on HLN, and 12,000 more than CNN’s Campbell Brown. Fox News’s O’Reilly Factor dominated the hour with 964,000 viewers age 25 to 54, and was the only cable news show in the time period to increase its audience, by 55%.

(Network President Phil) Griffin, not surprisingly, says he doesn’t believe Olbermann’s recent hiccups are part of any larger trend. “Keith has been our tentpole,” he says. “I watch the show every night. It’s a great show. It’s as smart and clever and fun as any out there, and I’m pleased with where we are.”

He attributes Olbermann’s January ratings slip to a news cycle in which international news, rather than domestic politics, was the No. 1 story. “On big, breaking international news, CNN tends to do better than us. They did a great job in Haiti, and I tip my hat to them,” he says. “We’re the place for politics, and there are times when politics does great, and there are times when it doesn’t.” With primaries in the midterm elections already looming, he says, “I think we’ll get our momentum back.”

Keith is a pole, all right …

What a disingenuous assessment. If MSNBC is the place for politics, as Mr. Griffin suggets, that network’s numbers should have gone through the roof in recent times. What news story has engaged America more than health care reform talk? Like it or not, it is still the defining story of Obama’s stumbling presidency. At the same time, the entire month of January was one non-stop “Obama – One Year Later” newsfest. Isn’t that the kind of stuff that MSNBC lives for? What was a bigger political story in January than Scott Brown’s election in Massachusetts? What about all the “terror trial” news in recent days? If that’s not a political issue, what is? And didn’t President Obama give a State of the Union address last month?

What in the name of Mrs. Columbo is Griffin talking about?

MSNBC should be making out like bandits in the rating race – using his criterion.

So, it was breaking international news every night at 8PM that caused Olbermann’s numbers to take a dive. Why didn’t I think of that?

Of course, both CNN and MSNBC lag far behind Fox News.

wordpress statistics

Posted in Keith Olbermann, leftism, Liberalism, Media, Television | Tagged: , , , , , | 2 Comments »


Posted by Andrew Roman on January 28, 2010

I know I shouldn’t laugh at this. It’s not like I’m personally invested. It isn’t as if I’m receiving any residual checks in the mail every time Fox News finishes ahead of the other cable networks. (I do, however, receive big fat direct Paypal deposits from the offices of the vast Right Wing Conspiracy on a rolling basis).

I really shouldn’t get such a charge out of this … but I can’t help it. I find it incredibly amusing.

Poor Keith Olbermann.

In the cable news ratings race for Tuesday, January 26th, The Big O finished behind that broadcasting mahatma, Joy Behar.

That’s right … Joy Behar beat Keith Olbermann in the ratings.

That’s like saying Chrone’s Disease edged out Ulcerative Colitis in the Irritable Bowel Sweepstakes.

I can’t be the only one who gets a charge out of this.

Of course, Behar received less than half of what Fox News’ lowest rated afternoon/evening program received – Shep Smith’s Fox Report, which hauled in over two million viewers – but she did also beat out ever-floundering Rachel Maddow.

MSNBC needs a hug.

While Bill O’Riley, Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity each pulled in over three million viewers, there wasn’t a single host on CNN that even got one million.

Both of their viewers could not be reached for comment.


H/T Drudge Report

wordpress statistics

Posted in Media, Television | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »


Posted by Andrew Roman on November 27, 2008

What is this nation coming to?

When an angry, radical, left-wing, hateful, alienated “used-to-be-someone” lesbian puts together a network television variety show, and no one watches, what can we conclude?

(That there is some hope – cursory as it may be – that civilization as we know it can be salvaged?)

Over at James Hibberd’s Live Feed blog:

The network’s attempt to revive the primetime variety show failed to draw an audience Wednesday night, tying for the evening’s lowest-rated program.

A mere 5 million viewers tuned in for the 8 p.m. premiere of “Rosie Live,” with the program earning a 1.2 preliminary adults 18-49 rating. The telecast matched ABC’s recently canceled “Pushing Daisies” as the night’s lowest-rated program on a major broadcast network.

NBC had high hopes for the special and planned to expand the program into a series should viewers re-embrace the decades-old variety format. Other networks, too, were watching closely since several are developing variety shows of their own.

“There’s a notion that the climate is right for the genre to make a comeback,” emailed one executive at a rival network. “I guess we now know what not to do, thanks to Rosie.”

I’m not sure how this didn’t shatter Neilsen records and spawn a line of Rosie-brand product lines, like action-figures and ear wax removal medicines.


Segments included Kathy Griffin impersonating Nancy Grace, Alec Baldwin hitting Conan O’Brian with a pie, O’Donnell singing “City Lights” with Liza Minnelli and Jane Krakowski doing a product-placement-themed striptease for White Castle burgers and Crest Whitestrips.

Critics were not kind. The NY Times described it as “hokey comedy with an enemies list.” TV Guide called it a “ghastly ego trip.” And the LA Times asked, “Rosie, what on earth were you thinking?”

There are plenty of things to give thanks for.

That this show will not be picked up by anyone anywhere at any time for any reason (I presume) is one of them.


Posted in Pop Culture, Television | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »