March 1, 2013, - 2:56 pm

Bonnie Franklin: Her Show, Politics Glamorized Single Motherhood, Helped Destroy US; NOW Abortion Activist

By Debbie Schlussel

Actress Bonnie Franklin died today at age 69 from cancer. I feel for her family, but I’m saddened by the ignorant, mindless gushing over Franklin and the acting gig for which she’s most famous–the show, “One Day at a Time.” The fact is that Bonnie Franklin was an unabashed liberal, NOW (National Organization for (Ugly) Women) member, and pro-abortion activist. Her show and her politics glorified single motherhood and helped destroy America. When “One Day at a Time” was on television, there were no cable and internet. There were just three major broadcast channels on TV, and her show, which featured a single mother who slutted around and had a parade of men “sleep over” (euphemism), wielded an enormous–and enormously negative–influence on the American family. As a kid, I could never understand why my babysitter, Andrea, made me watch this awful show. Bonnie Franklin is the mother of the breakdown of the American family. (And Norman Lear, who created the show and brought it to TV, is the father of it.)


Bonnie Franklin Ranting Her Liberal BS @ the NOW/Planned Parenthood/ACLU “March For Women’s Lives”

A Deceptively Catchy Theme Song for a Depressing, Destructive Show . . .

You only need look across America, its prisons, its high school drop-out population, its drug users, its perpetual cycles of babymamas giving birth to baby mamas to see the results. We know that most criminals come from single mother households. Ditto for those who drop out of school, become drug addicts, and become single mothers themselves. And Franklin’s depressing show, with its deceptive, misleading, and catchy theme song (that did not match the ample unhappiness in real-life single motherhood), contributed greatly to the kids out of wedlock who litter America and now make up in excess of 42% of births in America. Her typical brand of feminism devalued and destroyed America’s women with lasting, destructive consequences.

I’m not sure why anyone with any clue would celebrate Bonnie Franklin and her awful legacy. If you don’t get that generations and generations of single motherhood is much of the cause of crime, urban decay, and ignorance in America, you are a moron. Two-thirds of single women voted to re-elect Barack Obama in November. In excess of 75% of single mothers voted to return Obama to office. These are the women who are not around for their kids to teach them values, to teach their boys how to act like men, and their girls how they should be treated by men. These are women who would rather be friends with their kids and take them to hip-hop concerts than act like parents.

Bonnie Franklin was one of those Chico’s-smothered regular fixtures and speakers at National Organization for (Ugly) Women events. She was a big supporter of Planned Parenthood. She was one of the many far-left celebs–like Alec Baldwin–who participated in NOW’s and Planned Parenthood’s deceptively-titled “March for Women’s Lives.”

Make no mistake. Bonnie Franklin was a part of the counter-culture that eventually, sadly, became America’s culture. She was a part of the sex-with-no-consequences, abortion-on-demand, single-motherhood-is-cool movement for which America will forever pay and from which America will never recover. Casual sex, the hip-hop culture, diseases, teen moms . . . all of this grew out of the promotion of single motherhood that was the pinnacle of Bonnie Franklin’s career. It’s no coincidence that both the actresses who played her daughers, Mackenzie Phillips and Valerie Bertinelli, became drug addicts and slept around indiscriminately (Phillips even brags about an affair with her own father). This was the Bonnie Franklin/”One Day at a Time” lifestyle that is unfortunately the American lifestyle.

There is no reason to celebrate Bonnie Franklin, just because she suffered a terrible illness and passed away. I don’t wish that disease or death on her or her ilk, but her passing because of it doesn’t diminish the lasting damage she helped cause America with the rest of her crowd of fellow traveler Hollywood liberals. The breakdown of the American family was the breakdown of America, and she certainly did her part in that, one day at a time. America before the “contributions” of Bonnie Franklin was much better than the America after her presence graced us.

Good-bye, Bonnie Franklin. Who will clean up the mess that you left?


Many of my Jewish friends and acquaintances are lamenting the death of Bonnie Franklin because she was Jewish. I am not among them. Bonnie Franklin’s nominal religion is irrelevant, just as it was to her. I’m embarrassed that she had that accident of birth and don’t want to claim her. Her nominal religion and ethnicity are relevant only in that she died of pancreatic cancer, which occurs in higher frequency in Jewish people (the same cancer took my late father). She was one of those Va-JINOs (a female Jew In Name Only) I keep telling you about. Her religion was liberalism. Far-left liberalism. The social breakdown beyond all possible repair that is America was her salvation . . . and what destroyed America.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

43 Responses

I used to watch the show, but don’t remember much about it. I think I just watched it to see Valerie Bertinelli.

David on March 1, 2013 at 3:37 pm

All of Norman Lear’s shows had an undermining effect on America. He was a genius in the respect of producing wildly popular shows that all carried a common “message” of indicting, ridiculing and mocking traditional American values.

DS_ROCKS! on March 1, 2013 at 4:32 pm

I remember the show from way back and never thought of it the way you describe, and you are right. Norman Lear wanted to change the world and all his shows were designed as both social commentary and social activism. I can sum up his political stance with one word. Maud.

Fred Taub on March 1, 2013 at 4:39 pm

And the decline has been accelerating. Look at the attacks on the soon-to-be-defunct Defense of Marriage Act and the virulent aggression against religion symbolized by Sandra Fluke.

With Sonia Sotomayor,Maxine Waters and Hillary leading the way.

Little Al on March 1, 2013 at 4:56 pm

I don’t see where depiction amounts to advocacy. Granted, I’ve never bought into that Vanity Fair magazine line about TV being better than movies (isn’t, never has been and never will be), so I never watched more than a few episodes of “One Day at a Time.” The show was at best welterweight drama-comedy. But the notion that showing a single mom holding a family together constitutes male-bashing is, well, an extreme stretch. TV shows don’t cause divorce; bad marriage choices do.

As for baby mamas having baby mamas, blacks and Hispanics far outstrip whites in that department. They didn’t need lessons from Norman Lear to do what comes naturally to them.

Seek on March 1, 2013 at 6:03 pm

I hated this show and I do begrudgingly admit that I never liked BF. She always gave me the irrits. ALWAYS. And I was a feminist AND Liberal). Never liked her and always avoided her.

I agree w/DS regarding “single mums”. I really dislike “single mums” and I am instantly annoyed if you are one. A scourge to society and it just goes to show that men do not corner the market on evil.

I cringe when I remember “Murphy Brown” and how I was against what the VP said at the time. I have since been humbled and agree 100% with his sentiment. (And I never liked that dopey show “Murphy Brown” either…I guess I just liked her Libtard spewings but I was a Lib at the time so that explains my past stupidity…)

Skunky on March 1, 2013 at 7:37 pm

    Skunky, I was also a liberal when that show was on, and I disliked it as well, with Franklin being especially irritating.

    skzion on March 2, 2013 at 6:42 pm

      I like agreeing with you on many things Skzion. I don’t think I ever watched a whole episode. You found BF as irritating as I did.

      I was in single digits when it was on. Even thou’ I live d in a blue state and was a former feminist/Liberal I always feel a strong Conservative was somewhere inside of me waiting to emerge. We finally met after 9/11. 😀

      Skunky on March 2, 2013 at 8:43 pm

Interesting take. As usual I agree with you 100%. Just because somebody dies doesn’t give them a pass on how much of an idiot somebody lived their life. I compare it to the fuss so many people made out of Cassius Clay aka mohammed ali suffering from alzheimers disease. After looking at the way his inflammatory speeches and actions impacted our entire country, I have no sympathy for that mutant. Years ago I read a couple of books by him and Joe Frazier and still can’t believe how many people view Clay as a great man. Just the fact that Joe Fraziers kids were beaten and harassed, due to the words uttered by Clay, is disgusting. Then you look at the influence he held over the rest of his brainless fans….Hugo Chavez cancer doesn’t impact me either, except for whoever replaces him and fills that position.

samurai on March 1, 2013 at 7:57 pm

    Really liked your post, Samurai. Especially your Mohammed Ali points. You are so right about how he was regaled. I remember it as a young child and how Robin Quivers looked up to him and how Frazier was seen as a joke. When I see him now I get very annoyed and it has me questioning the past because like many things he was sanitized and was NOT a good bloke.

    Skunky on March 1, 2013 at 8:18 pm

    If you haven’t read his book on Clay/Ali, order Jack Cashill’s book “Sucker Punch” from his website
    You are exactly right about Ali and how he treated Frazier. Frazier took credit for helping to make Ali the stumble bum he is today, so there was some recompense. Amd Ali sold out Malcolm X.

    Concerned Citizen on March 2, 2013 at 4:33 am

I vaguely remember the show. It was just another worthless left wing anti-American anti-male show. I disagree with SEEK. It was agenda driven like a lot of other shows at the time. It was the typical stale theme of a level-headed female holding the family together while showing the male as an overbearing retard always jumping to conclusions to which he knows nothing about while telling everyone within earshot just how stupid they are. Of course he is always wrong. I don’t know why her death even deserves a comment or any news coverage. The show wasn’t that great.

jerry doegen on March 1, 2013 at 7:58 pm

I guess I don’t quite understand your beef with Bonnie Franklin’s role in the “One Day at a Time” series. Is it the notion that she played a divorced mother of two daughters rather than playing a single father being a widower (Fred MacMurray–“My Three Sons”)with three sons (or four, if you count Tim Considine as the eldest son, Mike.) They are just comedy/drama shows come and gone, reflecting a time and then the glimmer goes out with the advent of another decade, another drama.

Bonnie Franklin’s political advocacy for women is not the cause of today’s negative issues. Without that advocacy by a multitude of women (many women, great and small), women would still have no viable recourse in domestic/sexual abuse issues, income, housing, health, education, etc. equality. What you are striving for is a blanket answer to problems which have always existed behind closed doors in Western society, but are now out in the open and often hyped for media attention. There is no blanket answer that will fit each and every person anymore, if it ever did at all.

One of the drawbacks of the women’s movement that you ignore is that women are now forced into the workplace where once they were essentially, but not always, expected to be dependent on their husbands. It’s still a social expectation issue, only the stakes have changed. The economy now demands to be fed with more and more worker bees and women who would prefer to stay home now find it economically impossible even with the most simple lifestyle.

There are many arguments to be made about the cause and effect of social matters, but I think you are stretching it with any great influence of Ms. Franklin’s.

Taopi on March 1, 2013 at 8:17 pm

    If you can’t see the difference between a WIDOWER and a divorced mum, no one can help you in 2013. That’s entrenched ignorance. Speak to your shrink about that. Don’t bore a blog with your inabilities. It’s boring.

    “Bonnie Franklin’s political advocacy for women is not the cause of today’s negative issues.”

    Ah, yes it is (IBID to what I said in my FIRST paragraph). DS concluded that nicely in her column. RIF=Reading Is Fundamental. Please re-read what she wrote. She broke it down plainly so even YOU could understand.

    “…women would still have no viable recourse in domestic/sexual abuse issues, income, housing, health, education,…”

    Are you not bored yet with portraying women as the victims and men as the monsters in 2013??? It’s as boring as a Justin Bieber song. Wake up. One of the reasons I gave up feminism was because I couldn’t follow silly nutters who liked to lie and blame dump women’s issues on the men. Gimme a break! (I liked that show better than OD@AT…but it still wasn’t a fav….just sayin’…)

    Your 3rd paragraph tries to put the blame on men BUT the reason (for the problem) you do not want to see is FEMINISM itself. Men today are so wimpy (due to feminism) they need the female to work. And the female who has to (and wants to) work aided in de-masculating that man. If women today would choose a GREAT man who could actually provide for his family the way it SHOULD be, your issue would vanish. Your gripes are caused by feminism (and all the crap it has wrought) rather than an economic issue. And women making DUMB choices.

    DS was not stretching it. You just have to work on your reading comprehension and reconciling of facts in a better manner. That’s all.

    Skunky on March 1, 2013 at 8:37 pm


Taopi on March 1, 2013 at 9:05 pm

And ha again

Taopi on March 1, 2013 at 9:05 pm

    Topo Gigio, it IS hysterical when your silly argument is dismantled in seconds flat and the dentures are yanked out of yo’ mouth.

    I join you in laughing at you. LOLOL. Easier than remedial math! 😛

    Skunky on March 1, 2013 at 10:20 pm


“One Day at a Time” helped promote single motherhood in the US?

Are you kidding?

That show was a loud,screaming,obnoxious unfunny comedy about a disfunctional divorced-woman household with 2 mixed up teenage daughters. The constant yelling and arguing on that show probably SCARED some girls/women into NOT being in a single parent situation.

On that supposedly liberal show, sexual behavior for the 2 daughters was frowned upon, and any aquaintances of the 2 girls who acted sexual were portrayed negatively.

In addition to all that, McKenzie was fired from the show on 2 occasions because of substance abuse, and that added to the negative image of the show.

Scott on March 1, 2013 at 9:39 pm

Bonnie Franklin Ranting Her Liberal BS @ the NOW/Planned Parenthood/ACLU “March For Baby Deaths” might be a better fit.

Valerie Bertinelli character was the only reason to watch that show. The rest were as annoying as Schneider.

-“As for baby mamas having baby mamas, blacks and Hispanics far outstrip whites in that department. They didn’t need lessons from Norman Lear to do what comes naturally to them.
Seek on March 1, 2013 at 6:03 pm”-
Black Americans had some of the strongest family bonds until the liberals destroyed them with the welfare, free abortions and the rest of the crap they’re fond of handing out. The KKK were Liberal Democrats and the founder of Planned non-Parenthood (which was formed to decrease the Black American population) was a member in good standing.
Sorry Seek, but life imitates “art” in this case if you can call it that. Norman Lear took dysfunctionality along with a lot of -ism’s and bigotry and made it all cool, just to stick a few more bucks in his pocket. All in the Family and Maude probably sum up that scumbag the best.

Never watched Maude’s stupid show but anytime I ran across it I just wanted to slap his(her?) wimp-ass husband upside the head!

theShadow on March 1, 2013 at 10:49 pm

I don’t really think this tv show (which was before my time) had much to do with casual sex, diseases, hip-hop music, and the rest. That can probably be laid more fairly at the feet of the Supreme Court’s decisions on birth control and abortion. Those robed rats ought to be dug up and then reburied – face-down, naturlich.

Sta t us MoNkkeeY on March 1, 2013 at 11:28 pm

You want to know about the outcome of single motherhood? Look at the murder statistics in Chicago. Might want to check out how many of the murderers came from intact nuclear families with daddies present. As a former prison psychiatrist, I can tell you: less than 5%.

Thank you, Bonnie Franklin, ass hat extraordinaire!

Bertinelli and Phillips are both worthless human beings.

Occam's Tool on March 1, 2013 at 11:30 pm

I remember watching as a kid but didn’t pay too much attention to the content; with Valerie Bertenelli on the show, who cares???

Alan on March 2, 2013 at 1:07 am

When I heard about her demise, I was hoping Debbie would write something, and she did. Thanks. When Franklin’s steaming pile of crap show was on, I was a teenager, and feminism was just getting started as “Women’s Liberation.” I knew then that that was the beginning of the end.

Tommy Thomas on March 2, 2013 at 1:49 am

I have never seen the show, but I suspect that one more influence of Franklin and those like her was to promote a certain coarseness in our culture and manners.

Politeness and courtesy have diminished markedly in the last few decades. One of the reasons I suspect that Franklin helped promote this trend is by the comments in this post of those who support her (eg Taopi).

Just basic shows of respect like standing when you are introduced to someone, refraining from eating until everyone is served at a dinner, and so on have become rarer and rarer. And like the influence of words on actions, the decline of manners promotes (or should I say demotes) all the types of antisocial and parasitic behavior discussed by Debbie and the other contributors.

Little Al on March 2, 2013 at 7:50 am

Bonnie who?

Jack on March 2, 2013 at 10:15 am

I thought that ODAAT had the WORST theme song of any TV show. Plus, can you imagine if someone called Ann Romano a feminazi? I’d much prefer Beverly Hillbillies and Gilligan’s Island reruns more the same.

Kurt Toy on March 2, 2013 at 10:26 am

I must admit, I was a fan. I guess I thought Valerie Bertinelli was cute. The show doesn’t work now becauese the mother left a good-hearted, loving father and moved her girls from a comfortable home to an apartment in the city — all in the name of mom’s freedom. And don’t you hate how in TV and movies, someone can go to a big city and, despite little experience or education, land a chic office job? She got into advertising (!) At least ‘Alice’ and ‘Roseanne’ somewhat accurately portrayed the plight of inexperienced working women. Men who break up their families are always cads and heels, women are always victims.

DaveB on March 2, 2013 at 10:57 am

Aside from all the valid points raised by Debbie and others, let me go on a side note: Anyone notice how Schneider’s garb was almost a ripoff of the attire worn by Ed Norton (Art Carney) on The Honeymooners – minus Norton’s hat, of course.

And of course, just as with many other otherwise marginal celebrities who became famous over the last 40 years or so, nobody would have even heard of Ms. Franklin had not this pathetic, agenda-driven excuse for a TV show been foisted upon the American public in the first place.

ConcernedPatriot on March 2, 2013 at 11:27 am

Really loved the points made my ConcernedCitizen, Little Al and Occam’s Tool (you simmed it up nicely, OT!!). Excellent.

CC, I really enjoy JC. His theory (and facts) on Obama-Putin are VERY credible and well thought out. He also definitively and forensically proved that Bill Ayers wrote Obama-Putin’s book “Dreams From My Father”, but of course he is ignored as many truth-tellers are in 2013. You also reminded me of his hand in Malcolm X (Muhammed Ali, that is).

It’s plain to see that Valerie Bertinelli was the main draw of OD@AT and at least you can say it was because she was pretty in the wholesome “Girl Next Door” way. That is why peeps were so shocked when she married Eddie Van Halen. Very pretty in a very all-American (dark haired) way. Girls wanted to look like her. Today, there is more of a skank factor to the women/girl people like to look at.

(As an aside, a few years ago a bit of Sammy Hagar’s autobiography was printed in far-Lefty, useless rag “Rolling Stone”. To read about EVH demons was VERY scary and visceral. It was compelling in a very, very dark way. A good piece of reading if you don’t mind the dark side of life).

Skunky on March 2, 2013 at 12:19 pm

    @Skunky. Thanks, yeah as a boxing fan from the 70’s and self educated boxing historian, I look at present day Clay as payback for the sewage he pumped. Seeing him light the olympic torch cheapened that entire event. Yes, I was one of the people secretly wishing he’d lose his balance. Last I heard he was being cared for in a safe white northern Michigan community home. Oh sweet irony. Too bad he isn’t in a half way house in harlem or Zimbabwe. After all he really thought he was a king. Like Tyson, lol.

    samurai on March 2, 2013 at 2:26 pm

This makes me wonder what you’ll say about him when Mr Ed dies.

Joe Guiney on March 2, 2013 at 2:25 pm

While I suspect this show did real harm, it’s also true that the Franklins couldn’t wreck society without help from a multitude of wimps who either cheered or were too timid to do anything in response.

That situation remains today. How many “Republicans” will actually defend marriage by, for example, unloading the illegals that increase unemployment, which is in turn a major cause of divorce? Why WON’T Republicans decry the welfare queens/babymammas?

skzion on March 2, 2013 at 6:57 pm

Do popular and successful TV shows mirror or forecast the society that consumes these shows? Or do these popular and successful shows modify or redirect human behavior, shaping society? I don’t think this is a which came first, chicken or egg type question, and I suspect that both theorems are true; TV mirrors/forecasts, but it also influences and molds behaviors.

Once upon a time, “Ozzie & Harriet” set the pace for the “normal” American family. Outmoded concepts like “decency,” “honesty,” “responsibility” and “integrity” were frequently explored in those O&H shows. But the reality was even then that a family unit even under the best of circumstances could be changed, such as by the death or divorce of a spouse. Never fear. TV always stands ready to fill that gap. So that era also had shows like “My Three Sons,” which starred Fred McMurray as a single father, raising–you guessed it–his three sons.

In recent years, the TV landscape covers a very broad spectrum of social situations. Some shows deal with an older man and his younger wife, racial intermarriages, lesbian couples, homosexual couples, etc.

The TV producers will tell you that they are only responding to the changing trends in society. And there is some truth to that. But, if you catch them in unguarded moments, they will also tell you that they want their shows to convey “messages.” And that is where the social shapping comes into play.

And not all of these messages are bad. Some popular and sucessful family shows like “The Jeffersons,” while they entertain, also convey the message that you can be successful in America regardless of your race, but you often have to do it yourself, by going into business–such as the dry cleaning business. And other family shows like Bill Cosby’s had an implicit message that being a different race or religion didn’t mean that you didn’t face the same problems and issues that anyone else might face, i.e., that people have more in common than they might think.

Turning to “One Day at a Time,” I was very young at the time, and like many here, I have few memories of the show, mostly of–you guessed it again–Valerie Bertinelli. However, I happened to also remember and enjoy Pat Harrington as Schnieder, as I’ve enjoyed in other TV and movie roles, and I think he’s been a very talented and versatile actor. But the remember next to nothing abot the social theme of the show.

However, in retrospect, it seems likely that “One Day at a Time” was one of those shows that both repsonded to and accurately forecast the single-mom trend in American society. How many women who have seen the show were influenced by it remains unknown. There has been plenty of opportunity for sociologists to have performed surveys of single moms during the era of that show and after, but as far as we know, nobody in academia is doing such social research to link by correlation the shows with the behaviors and lifestyle choices.

There is no question that TV has the power to influence behaviors and lifestyles. Advertisers would not have been spending hundreds of millions of dollars backing these shows, if those shows (and advertisements) did not have such powers.

But ultimately, the blame for society’s ills rests with the society that permits those ills to grow. Nobody (so far) is forcing anyone to watch some particular TV show or movie, and if a TV show or movie has a theme that offends, they don’t have to patronize it. So the fact that “One Day at a Time” was so popular in its day is a reflection on that society that chose to patronize it.

Ask yourself, for example, why is it that there are no heros in TV shows or the movies like the characters that Jimmy Stewart played? The answer, unfortunately, is not that there aren’t good actors like Stewart anymore–unique as he was. The real tragedy is that a TV show or movie with a leading role for a character like he played wouldn’t succeed today. The values of the characters he portrayed are outmoded today.

For an eloquent take on this sad situation, see this 6 minute clip of Orson Welles’ tribute to Jimmy Stewart on the Dean Martin Roast show (which always had a fantastic group of entertainers on):

Ralph Adamo on March 2, 2013 at 9:34 pm

It should also be noted that OD@AT‘s producer, Norman Lear, in the same year this show premiered (1975), was one of several TV producers that railed against the setting aside of a “Family Hour” on TV. Gee, I wonder why? (sarc / rhetorical)

ConcernedPatriot on March 2, 2013 at 9:47 pm

The left has controlled the media, both entertainment and news, education and social services for half a century. Now we are two countries within out borders, divided by a common language. Terms like “fair share”, “common sense” have a totally different meaning to the left and the right, who like the universe continue to move further apart by the minute. I don’t know what the future will bring but those who are prepared for the worst will fare better than those who are unprepared.

Bonzer Wolf on March 3, 2013 at 11:09 am

The show was very carefully contrived…

From the less than attractive female lead (Franklin), whom women who saw themselves as victims could identify; to the older sister with all sorts of problems; to the cute little sister, to bring in the young males to boost the ratings.

Quite telling that neither of the show’s daughters—who had been through a host of problems in their real lives–ever disavowed the cynical phony crap that was this series.

Red Ryder on March 4, 2013 at 9:24 am

Hi Debbie:

You know, I was rather angry with you about your comments towards Ms.Franklin and the fact that not only did you post this on a Friday but, you attacked a person who could not respond in her own defense. Sure you apologized but, you did it anyway.

As a Jewish person, I had to remind myself that perhaps your babysitter traumatized you as a child and made you watch Ms. Franklin’s program and this is why you chose to strike out your anger on her. I also had to remind myself what the Torah says and perhaps you would benefit from clicking on the link I will include in this comment. The Torah says, “Judge Favorably” perhaps and it’s just a suggestion, you could try to understand the true meaning of this and apply this in your life. You won’t make a lot of money on it but, in the end, this is not what life is about.

All the best to you!

Dear “Rabbi” Joanne: I do not believe in female rabbis. However, I wish to set the record straight: I did not apologize, and I still do not apologize for this post. Thank you. DS

Joanne on March 4, 2013 at 2:31 pm

    Joanne, sweety, what’s wrong with posting this before Shabbat?

    It’s hilarious how you va-jinos look to Torah only when you want to destroy Torah (and decency). Your link hardly supports your position. Indeed, Debbie actually did what that rabbi recommended.

    YOU, however, in attacking a fellow Jew in public when you could easily have communicated privately, sin greatly.

    skzion on March 4, 2013 at 11:11 pm

I don’t think One Day at a Time glamourized divorce. Franklin’s character struggled financially and emotionally as a result of her divorce. They didn’t live in a house but a smallish apartment, so that’s not glamorous. I don’t think we should be critical of women who divorce for legitimate reasons, like an unfaithful husband or a husband who is emotionally or verbally abusive. I constantly wonder why bad behaviour from men is so tolerated by everyone. It is no wonder that men love the concept of forgiveness, they constantly need to be forgiven.

Dorothy J. Petrovich on March 4, 2013 at 9:52 pm

    Dot, dearie, what would you know about men?

    If you were hetero, you would drive most any man to be unfaithful.

    skzion on March 4, 2013 at 11:14 pm

I agree with Dorothy on this. The situation portrayed in the sitcom is not comparable to women who have children out-of-wedlock.

Laura on March 5, 2013 at 1:17 pm

You are freaking brilliant. The perfect and elegant encapsulation of this horrible woman was one of the best blogs I have ever read. I know it has been over a year, but I happened to see a Top Ten Most Miserable Shows to Work On list on Buzzfeed (I am a sucker for lists) and it mentioned that loathsome show. I remember being a kid when it was on and thinking this woman seemed to espouse everything I and my family did NOT believe in. Debbie, you didn’t just hit the nail on the head, you took the nail out and machine-gunned it. Best. Blog. Ever. (oh, and I totally get the embarrassment to your religion. I am Church of Christ…among OUR former members was Jeffrey Dahmer!). Keep up the good work. I will be searching out your posts and blogs…

Richard Hubbell on July 31, 2014 at 11:12 pm

I just ran across this posting as I was researching another topic. You certainly have a right not to agree with Ms. Franklin’s portrayal of a fictional character and the societal impact…However, I question your method. Instead of sticking to simple facts you sunk to name calling and insults. It is that attitude that has led to the decline of intellectual debate and constructive conversation. You are upset about the supposed negative impact of a television show but fail to understand the negative impact your incendiary remarks have on society. I encourage you to focus on facts and not personal attacks. By doing so, your argument would be taken seriously. Instead, it simply comes off as hypocritical. The only thing you accomplished is solidifying the support of those who already agreed with you and turning away those that did not. You simply wasted a post that, if argued correctly, could have been a great discussion.

Jay Routh on December 24, 2016 at 9:53 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field