Comments by "Hey get off my lawn!" (@heygetoffmylawn1572) on "ABC News" channel.

  1. So let's get this straight...he became famous because he was a black version of Archie Bunker. Who was wrong. George Jefferson was wrong. Two wrongs don't make it right. The bigotry was exploited so Norman Lear could make a buck & live in a mansion.
    7
  2. Henry Winkler...still a class act. Truly a TV icon. Overcame a learning disability to be one of the TV greats of all time.
    5
  3. All animals should be FREE. FREE THE ANIMALS!!!! It is inhumane to keep pets. Having any kind of pets is inhumane.
    1
  4. RetroGuy76...Okay...whatever.
    1
  5. Interesting...Norman Lear, et al made millions of dollars from exploiting the worst stereotypes in us all. We all laughed. The ratings went up. He laughed all the way to the bank.
    1
  6. RetroGuy76?...Wouldn't you agree Norman Lear's "art & talent" brought out the worst in the culture of the time? His programs magnified characteristics of people that should have been pitied and not glorified in laughter. Did his programs improve the culture on a whole? How many of us saw ourselves in those characters and said ..."I must change." ? 40 + years later the culture hasn't changed for the better because of his type of "art" form. My conclusion is Norman Lear exploited the worst in our culture and ourselves and made loads of money doing it. Couldn't he use his art form to find something good in the human condition and raise the culture up? No laughs in the good things of the culture = low ratings = no money. His negativity only created more of the same...for the sake of "art"? The culture takes on the forms of the art it experiences.
    1
  7. Alonzo Shorter...thanx for setting me straight. Never heard of Eric Monte. That's a new name to me. Did he do anything else on TV that you know of? It figures Norman Lear would steal someone else's ideas.
    1
  8. RetroGuy76...I see your point. Would it be fair to say the "art" enhanced and helped to mold the reality? I understand the issues of the time. However, by making them an "art" form for certain TV executives to leave the table with boat loads of money based on people who actually experienced the negativity, was wrong to do. Many of the stories may or may not have happened because the writers took poetic license to enhance the "art". On TV perception is reality. Norman Lear et. al. took the many cultural wounds of the time and never allowed them to heal by his "art". It only created more negativity along with very poor government policies. Mostly all the programs were written for laughs. Which brought viewers back for more, that in turn increased ratings, equaling more money for Norman Lear et.al. Why didn't he create a character like Bill Cosby's....Dr. Cliff Huxtable back then? Because it wasn't perceived as reality, albeit those types of characters and stories existed at the time too. Norman Lear chose to focus on all he could on the negative of the culture and the time. There were alot of positive characters he could have included in his "art", but, no laughs equals no money.
    1
  9. Alonzo Shorter...Thanks for the history lesson. There always seems to be another side of Norman Lear we never know.
    1
  10. Back in the olden days they would have a duel at 10 paces...1 shot. Better be a good aim.
    1
  11. He is a class act. Yet another victim of Bill Cosby. He lost lucrative residuals that dried up when reruns of the Cosby Show were pulled from TV channels.
    1
  12. If he really was suicidal...he would have done it by now and get it over with. He's just trying to get attention or some kind of publicity. If someone said to him...go and do it. He wouldn't. He'd find some excuse for not doing it. Face reality.
    1
  13. What happened to Tom Brokaw's voice...he sounds like some wino trying to believe he's sober.
    1