"As news broke that Tripp was near death, Lewinsky tweeted: 'no matter the past, upon hearing that linda tripp is very seriously ill, i hope for her recovery. i can’t imagine how difficult this is for her family.'"

From "Linda Tripp, whose tapes exposed Clinton affair, dies at 70" (AP).

While defending the taping as necessary to protect herself if her credibility were questioned, Tripp also consulted with a New York literary agent before beginning her secret recordings. Her initial concerns proved warranted when officials and pundits questioned her motives and attacked her character.

Tripp soon became a recognizable member of the wide cast of characters in the impeachment drama, so much so that actor John Goodman appeared as Tripp several times on “Saturday Night Live.”...

That was back when women who came forward and exposed sexual harassment in the workplace were treated as fat, ugly, old, jealous, self-aggrandizing freaks. But America had not yet learned about sexual harassment... other than that time we watched the high-profile, televised attack on Clarence Thomas. Who portrayed Anita Hill on "Saturday Night Live"?

(Watch Goodman as Tripp here.)

Pope slap.

I approve. The Pope — and anyone else who's doing personal, physical contact with a crowd— gets to decide where he stops. He kept going until he got to a child, and, yes, that's disappointing to the last person who would have been touched if the toucher had not stopped exactly where he did.

(That happened to me once. Not with the Pope. With Ray Davies, who I'm sure was more important to me than he was to the last person he touched.)

Now, that woman not only reached out and touched him, she grabbed him. And she not only grabbed him, she yanked him. That was completely wrong, criminally wrong. She got slapped. Lucky her! A quick chastisement, firmly delivered, absolutely justified.

She was still holding on when he slapped. It was a let-go-of-me slap, not a swift-vengeance-punishment sort of slap... which would have been more interesting!

ADDED: When we watched that video yesterday, Meade said, "Thanks, I needed that," which set off a search for the old TV commercial. And here it is (did you know the actor, back in 1979, was John Goodman?):



AND: The Pope responded (after the video went viral): "So many times we lose our patience; me too, and I apologize for yesterday’s bad example."

I like that he apologized because he didn't want to be a bad example. It's because it was seen and others might do it that he apologized.

PLUS: I happen to think he set a good example. If someone has grabbed you and is aggressively pulling on you, you have a right to use force to free yourself. It's interesting that he used the words "me too." I think of the #MeToo movement and the many stories of women who don't have a well developed fight or flee response. Kindness is not free.

About Roseanneless "Roseanne" and persons "of colors."

I'm trying to read "How ABC changed ‘Roseanne’ into ‘The Conners’ and kept the status quo/The frustrating reality of the entertainment industry" by Monica Castillo at The Lily (which is a woman-oriented offshoot of The Washington Post).

Castillo objects to the new version of the show — "Roseanne" without Roseanne — because the actors and writers employed on the old show could have been used to produce a completely new show. Castillo then gives us this paragraph (as if it supports the proposition that a completely new show should be devised to keep the the old show's people employed):

Yesterday, the Directors Guild of America published their diversity figures for movie directors, revealing a shocking. but not entirely surprising statistic: There were fewer directors of colors helming movies last year than in 2013....

Directors of colors? Is that how we talk now? Is there some idea that because "directors" is plural that you should also pluralize "color"? That's not the grammar rule I was taught in high school by an English teacher who justified the rule by maintaining that it is manifestly ridiculous to say to a group of people "use your heads" (because it creates the image of individuals with more than one head).

Maybe the plural seemed to express Castillo's interest in colors other than black (and "directors of color" seemed to signify only black directors). But maybe it's just a typo. Later in the column, I do see "directors of color."

Anyway — beyond that strange phrase — I don't see what the interest in employing more nonwhite directors has to do with whether John Goodman, Sara Gilbert, et al., do a completely new show or play the familiar roles of Dan and Darlene Conner.

That question has to do with what will draw an audience. I wonder how the new show will be promoted. The message will be:

Hey, don't you want to watch "Roseanne" without Roseanne? You loved "Roseanne" so much that you'll love it without Roseanne, who had to go because... well, you know, for that reason we don't what to talk about anymore, and we hope that you remember so you'll know why this is "Roseanne" without Roseanne, but you won't want to reopen the question why she had to be made a total outcast from all polite society.

Putting that in writing, I'm thinking I'd be interested in a new show, starring Roseanne Barr, about the greatest woman in the history of television, who Ambien-tweeted a stupid joke that everyone took to be racist and who got kicked out of her own TV home and who is now ranting and raving — watching "Roseanne" without Roseanne on the TV in her home on a nutty macadamia farm in Hawaii.

I'm hoping ABC is taking my advice and redoing "Roseanne" centered on Sara Gilbert's character.

I'm seeing this at Deadline Hollywood:

I hear the show’s producers will be meeting with Disney-ABC executives on Monday to pitch a revamped Roseanne without the title star (and likely the original title too)....

Details about the concept that will be pitched are unclear but the show is expected to stay true to the praised first season of the revival — the series’ 11th overall — featuring the other cast members except Barr. There could be stronger emphasis on Sara Gilbert’s character Darlene, which can be expected since the revival was centered mainly on three characters, Roseanne (Barr), Dan (John Goodman) and their daughter Darlene (Gilbert) who moved back home with her kids.

As we previously reported, executive producers Tom Werner, who also executive produced the original series, and Gilbert, the main driving force behind the revival, are believed to be spearheading the efforts to continue the show and keep the writers, led by executive producer/showrunner Bruce Helford, and crew employed post-cancellation.

I said this when I first heard about the cancelation:

I feel sorry for Sara Gilbert:

Gilbert, who played Darlene on "Roseanne" and had been largely credited with spearheading the relaunch of the sitcom, tweeted that Barr's statements "do not reflect the beliefs of our cast and crew or anyone associated with our show."

"I am disappointed in her actions to say the least," Gilbert continued. "This is incredibly sad and difficult for all of us, as we’ve created a show that we believe in, are proud of, and that audiences love -- one that is separate and apart from the opinions and words of one cast member."

I'll say what Gilbert is not saying: She just got her good work and her rising career shot to hell.

ADDED: "Darlene Is the Best Reason to Watch the New Rosanne."

And this the next morning:

I'm skeptical. Did ABC really cancel "Roseanne," or are we sucked into high-drama theater with more scenes to come? Is this like the Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un show, where it's on, then it's off, then it's on?...

Before the reboot, the series had ended with Roseanne's husband dead. So come back with Roseanne dead. Was she really the without-which-none of the show? She's a bad actor compared to the others. John Goodman and Laurie Metcalf are at the complete opposite end of the scale — great actors. Sara Gilbert ("Darlene") seems to have been the brains of the reboot. She could become the central character. Build the new season around John Goodman, Laurie Metcalfe, and Sara Gilbert, and leave the dead weight of Roseanne behind.

But in the comments, daskol waxed pessimistic:

Great actors are moons and need a planet. Great TV writers too, and even clever Sara Gilbert is merely a moon without a planet. Roseanne is a planet.