Oprah's Couch For Obama Only

[ariesgem]

Oprah Winfrey may be getting behind Barack Obama's presidential campaign with vigor this year -- she'll raise $3 million for him when she holds a fundraiser at her California estate on Saturday.

It means she'll be wading into the political world as never before. In 2000, she had Al Gore and George Bush for guest appearances. And California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has dropped by her couch.

But truth be told, she says she's not that fond of having politicians on her show. In a radio interview rebroadcast on her web site, Winfrey explains why it is the rare exception for her to have politicians as guests on her television talk show.

"The reason I don't do politicians on the show is because you get that political speak thing," she says. "You ask the question. You have a limited amount of time and politicians are usually so rehearsed that you don't get a real answer. And so, I'm sitting there grinning, smiling, when I know I havn't gotten the answer. And to get the answer to one question with some clarity takes so much time that I, in the past, have just not done it."

This year, she says, Obama will be the lone presidential candidate to grace her studio. "If everybody knows I'm for Barack it would be really disingenuous of me to be sitting up there interviewing other people as though... pretending to be objective. So I won't be doing anybody because of that, on my show."

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/09/05/post_59.html

[TwilightGardener]

1. Because she knows he's the only one who will give her genuine

answers instead of rehearsed sound bites.

[Bucky]

27. Oh, bullshit.

Biden, Kucinich, & Dodd all speak off the cuff frequently and with ease. You've obviously never seen Edwards wing it. When he does so, it's a sight to behold. I think he's probably as good as Bill Clinton in an audience give-and-take format (though obviously not the Dog's equal in the debate format).

[huskerlaw]

97. ...

:spray:

:rofl:





:eyes:

[wyldwolf]

2. hmmm... the Obama campaign may have to list appearances as "in kind contributions."

[Colobo]

3. Oprah is supporting the right candidate. She should be admired for that, wyld.

[ElizabethDC]

7. Or not. n/t

[Colobo]

10. Obama deserves all the support he can get. Oprah is doing the right thing.

History will prove her right.

[wyldwolf]

13. that isn't what this is about. My point is from now on, appearances become contributions...

...to Obama's campaign.

[JTFrog]

26. How much does Bill usually

pull in for his speeches? Having Oprah on his side just balances the game a little. Hillary has had a nice little advantage having a popular ex-president campaigning with her.

*edit to say WITH her, not FOR her. Would like to stay somewhere near politically correct.

[wyldwolf]

31. You're missing the entire point

But I'm beginning to think the Obama supporters are missing the point intentionally.

I'll break it down for you. When Bill Clinton gives a speech, he is paid for it. He provides a service for a fee. But he isn't running for public office.

Oprah has endorsed Obama and declared NO OTHER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE will appear on her show excpet Obama. So now when/if Obama appears on her show, the FEC could legally consider that a advertisement for Obama and could legally enforce "in-kind contribution" status on it, meaning Obama would have to assign a value to that appearance and list it as a campaign donation from Oprah.

[JTFrog]

37. I'm not an Obama supporter.

But then I'm not a Hillary supporter either. I'm just happy to see things a little less lopsided. I understand what you are saying, but I feel the same about Bill stumping for Hillary as you do with Oprah and BO (minus the ethics thing that will have to be cleared up before I bite). I'll probably change my mind about that if there turns out to be legal issues. I'm still just watching the show.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

59. However

When Bill stumps for Hillary, the campaign still pays for his expenses, I'm sure. The campaign will pay for any political ads Bill makes. Get it?

Obama is going to get free airtime worth a LOT of money. If Oprah is going to come out as a supporter, he might just have to declare his appearances as donations.

[Exultant Democracy]

80. Yes you are right, it would be an in kind donation, I don't know why people

are trying to argue with that. I support Obama, but I have worked on a campaign before and the rules on this are pretty clear.

[Booster]

88. I understand your point, but I'm just as happy NOT having to

watch Oprah's shows that would have to give equal time to the likes of Mitt Romney, Rudy and that Fred guy. It's Oprah's show so she can do what she wants.

[dmr]

93. Exactly.

I know laws have changed, but candidates are/were to be given equal opportunity on the airways. Maybe that happens after the primaries, I don't remember. I do remember that TV could not air Reagan's Bedtime for Bonzo movies because that free on-air exposure was unfair to the other candidate.

Many of us wrote to Oprah when she had Maria and Arnold on her show when he was campaigning for California's governor after the Gray Davis recall. We thought it to be unfair to the other candidates. She thought then as she does now, differently.

[WCGreen]

87. Bill can't use his money for HRC presidential campaign...

It's against the law...

[Ethelk2044]

30. Where is a legal document that states that.

[wyldwolf]

33. Ever ran for office? Ever worked on FEC reports for a political campaign?

If yes, then you know full well the FEC laws on in-kind contributions. If not, then you don't and I understand how real-world campaigning might seem foreign to you.

[sandnsea]

50. Chung, Huang, Hsu, Chatwal - Four Fraudulent Fundraisers

So just shut up about celebrities appearing with candidates which has been done for 100 years.

[Kagemusha]

6. How the hell is that going to be policed?

This is hardly the first time I've heard such a proposal and it doesn't seem any more brilliant or well advised than the last 10 times I've heard it. Where does the government go assessing the dollar value of, let's say, newspaper editorial endorsements?

[wyldwolf]

11. Oprah just policed it herself.

By coming out for Obama publically and saying he will be the only presidential candidate on her show, any appearance Obama makes now amounts to donated campaign time, or, an in kind contribution. Which is going to get trick. Say, in the New York market a :30 second spot on Oprah runs $50,000. If Obama is on for 15 minutes, we're talking a BIG in kind contribution.

[BeyondGeography]

15. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaah, everyone isn't for MY candidate so I'm going to make up pretend rules

just to piss people off.

You're funny.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ripple]

23. Your links don't back up your claim

Political endorsements are not considered 'in-kind' contributions, as there is no way to assess their tangible value. The same goes for television appearances.

[wyldwolf]

24. what you just stated is not my claim

Oprah can endorse whoever she pleases, but to give her endorsed candidated unmatched air-time on a highly rated TV show is simply not the same as her just endorsing him.

I'm a writer. I can endorse you for Mayor. But the moment I start writing your press releases, it becomes a contribution.

[ripple]

32. She isn't writing his press releases

and you appear to be speaking more to the Fairness Doctrine (which isn't even in place right now) than to campaign finance law. To my knowledge, the Fairness Doctrine wouldn't apply to an entertainment show such as Oprah's, anyway.

When newspapers write a nice, long editorial endorsing a candidate, is it considered an in-kind contribution? I think not, yet the endorsement of a major newspaper can sometimes do a lot to influence the outcome of an election.

Oprah can have Obama on her show and support him all she wants, provided she isn't providing him with any sort of tangible contribution. If her guests were actually paid for their appearances on her show, you might have a case, but I doubt they are.

[wyldwolf]

36. no, she's donating air time to his campaign

and you appear to be speaking more to the Fairness Doctrine

No, I'm speaking to the FEC's "In-kind contribution" laws. Tell you what. YOU run for office. Convince the owner of a local TV station to endorse you then give you free air time the exclusion of the other candidates, then DON'T report it on the in-kind donations page of your FEC financial report. See how fast you opponents report you for it.

[ripple]

40. Can you show me something, anything

indicating that an appearance on a television entertainment show- even with the endorsement of the host- constitutes an in-kind contribution? So far, none of the links you've posted back up that claim.

Again, if guests were actually paid for their appearances, you might have a point. I doubt Oprah's guests are paid for the privilege of appearing on her show.

As for your TV station analogy, it doesn't apply to the Oprah situation largely for the same reason. Since a station generally charges for advertising time, one would be able to quantify the worth of donated advertising time for a given candidate. Since no money is exchanged for guest appearances on Oprah's show (or endorsements for that matter), there is nothing tangible to report to the FEC.

[wyldwolf]

44. are you asking for a document that gives every single example of an in-kind contribution?

I've given the definition of it, and I've provided examples of it with links. I think, at least based on my experience, the FEC hopes they don't have to hold a candidate's hand through the filing process.

"Well, I know having a printer endorse me and print all my signs is an in-kind donation, and I know having an office building owner endorse me and donate office space is an in-kind donation, and I know having a radio station endorse me and then run free commercials for me is an in-kind donations, but honestly, your honor, I HAD NO IDEA having a major TV show endorse me then give me free exposure to millions had any value at all!"

LOL!

[ripple]

51. From your own links:

An in-kind contribution is a non-cash input which can be given a cash value.

in-kind contributions - Contributions of equipment, supplies, or other tangible resource, as distinguished from a monetary grant. Some organizations may also donate the use of space or staff time as an in-kind contribution.

‘Besides checks and currency, the FEC considers "...anything of value given to influence a Federal election" to be a contribution. Note that this does not include volunteer work. As long as you are not compensated for it, you can perform an unlimited amount of volunteer work.
Donations of food, beverages, office supplies, printing or other services, furniture, etc. are considered "in-kind" contributions, so their value counts against contribution limits’.

The difference between the examples you provided and the Oprah situation is that there is no tangible value that can be assessed with regard to Obama's appearance on her show. None! In contrast, a printer has a price they charge for their services, a landlord has a rental fee, and radio stations charge an established amount for air time. That's the difference. You might not like it or approve, but that is how the FEC views it.

[tinrobot]

76. Broadcast time is valuable.

The difference between the examples you provided and the Oprah situation is that there is no tangible value that can be assessed with regard to Obama's appearance on her show.

If Obama bought the same amount of air time from the stations directly, it would have value. The other poster is arguing that the same value would be applied to an exclusive appearance on Oprah. Technically, that's correct, but enforcement is difficult.

Jay Leno had Schwazenegger on his show, but didn't offer up time to the other candidates, for example. The Democrats did make a stink, but they didn't get resolution. (But, I don't think Leno went out and endorsed Schwarzenegger, so his action is less direct than Oprah's situation)

[BeyondGeography]

78. Endorsements by private citizens aren't the issue, equal-time potentially is

but networks have consistently maintained that entertainment shows with a news component are exempt from equal-time requirements. And the FCC has never disagreed with them.

In other words, there's no there there.

[ripple]

98. The network isn't giving him the time, Oprah is.

There is no measurable value and therefore, it isn't an FEC issue.

[Kagemusha]

53. So your position is that Obama is violating donation limits 5000x times over?

And should be penalized for a few what... hundreds of millions in damages, and if he can't pay, throw his butt in prison?

[BeyondGeography]

38. Does that mean we get to charge Hillary for "Ellen"?

"Your type" likes to pull shit of thin air when things don't go exactly the way you want them to.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BeyondGeography]

41. You're going nowhere with this

It becomes a free speech issue at the end of the day. Can you imagine a scenario whereby the GOP is billed for every interview that Rush Limbaugh does with the Republican nominee? Air America for airtime with the Democrats once the nominee is chosen? They might not say other candidates don't get airtime on their show but the practical effect is the same. Your little snit about Oprah is nothing more than a trip to legal and political quicksand.

[wyldwolf]

46. and your clueless of at least FEC regulations and possibly even potential violations

I have said from the start that this is "potential" and "possible."

[BeyondGeography]

48. LOL...everything is potential and possible

You've got nothing.

[rinsd]

43. Did Ellen hold a fundraiser for Hillary? Has Ellen declared Hillary to be the only one on her show?

[BeyondGeography]

47. Forget the ONLY one on the show, what if EVERYONE doesn't get a chance?

By Howlin' Wolf's logic, shouldn't ALL the campaigns who get to go on TV be billed? If Gravel, Kucinich and Dodd don't get invited to a show but the rest do, isn't that an in-kind contribution to the candidates that got airtime?

Do you see how silly this can get?

[rinsd]

57. This situation is kind of unique beyond a regular TV show because of Oprah's direct involvement.

That is what makes this different from candidates appearing on other shows.

Obama also appeared on the Tyra Banks show recently (or is supposed to) but you won't hear much about that because Tyra is not raising millions for his campaign.

WW does have a point here.

And it is something that has come up in the last few years from Howard Stern seeking the governor's mansion in NY to Ahnuld's appearances during the recall to Fred Thompson now.

[BeyondGeography]

64. Her fundraising activites as a private citizen have no legal relationship to her show

and, as long as entertainment shows are judged to have a news component, equal-time requirements don't apply:

"Consistent with 'The Tonight Show with Jay Leno's' previous practice, NBC is following the news guidelines for interviewing a political candidate. Under the news guidelines, the scheduled appearance of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger ... is not subject to the FCC's equal time provisions."

Since news shows and entertainment often blur together, the "equal time" rule adopted by the FCC has been stretched. In general, broadcast entertainment programs must provide equal time if a left-out candidate requests it, but news programs are exempt on free-speech grounds.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/politicalmuscle/2006/10/democrats_deman.html

[rinsd]

67. This article states something similar but adds a little more grist for the mill

The fundraiser may be only the start. The Winfrey and Obama machines have maintained silence on the exact nature of their talks over what her role will be, but the idea of her appearing in television ads and other appeals is very much in play. She offered during a recent interview with CNN's Larry King: "My money isn't going to make any difference. My value to him -- my support of him -- is probably worth more than any other check that I could write."

<snip to get to the stuff for you>

Winfrey's show is not subject to any "equal time" obligations, because Federal Communications Commission rules do not apply to news programs, interview shows and documentaries in which the candidate is not the sole focus.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/04/AR2007090402188_pf.html

My feeling is that we may see some type of complaint if Obama gets the nomination and appears during the GE.

None of the Democrats is going to complain to the FEC or FCC about this.

[BeyondGeography]

70. So the media has value...that's why the right-wing has spent years building up talk radio

and Fox News and that's why they won't say a thing about Oprah.

The VRWC as Hilly calls it has been playing the news loophole on equal time for all it's worth. Someone from our side finally gets a little airtime advantage and all your friend Wolfie can think about is how to make this an FEC violation. :silly:

[rinsd]

84. I can't speak for Wolf.

He made his point, it has been discussed and I think most of us are in some sort of agreement about what will actually happen.

But I think you underestimate the rw capacity for hypocrisy.

They attacked a war veteran for being too gung ho while their candidate didn't even show up for his service for crissakes.

So just saying don't be shocked if they yet again prove themselves to be hypocrites.

[CTLawGuy]

73. so when Tim Russert has a candidate on MTP

he has to have all of them on, or it's a "contribution?"

[rinsd]

8. Hmmm curious. What would be the basic legal rules governing that?

[wyldwolf]

14. any service or activity that directly benefits a candidate is considered an in kind contribution.

Say the print shop down the road prints the signs for your City Council race. Well, the value of those signs must be reported as a contribution.

The local TV station gives you a chunk of time? The value of that time is a donation and must be listed as such.

Now Oprah, by admitting NO OTHER presidential candidate will be on her show, has just stated every Obama appearance is, in effect, a campaign contribution to Obama. A very costly one, too.

[rinsd]

17. I know the basics but didn't Ahnuld appear on Oprah with no reciprication for Davis or others?

Also in that vein, what about Leno?

[wyldwolf]

18. yes, but the difference is Oprah had not declared herself an agent for Arnold

[rinsd]

20. That is true.

She didn't do fundraisers and the like for Ahnuld.

Ok skipping ahead, let's say the FEC rules against him and Oprah AFTER his appearance.

Wanna ballpark the "cost" for such an appearance? $5M? $10M?

[wyldwolf]

25. well, the FEC doesn't often go after these things. Remember Sinclair Broadcasting and Kerry?

[tigereye]

69. I'm not sure that restating this opinion will make it so....

I for one thinks it's cool that this very powerful AA woman is supporting a viable and intelligent AA presidential candidate.

[beaconess]

100. And therein, I believe, lies the problem.

Folks seem to be having real trouble wrapping their minds around the concept of a black female billionaire doing everything she can - fully within the law - to support a black candidate.

[beaconess]

99. Really? You have a Bill Clinton avatar and actively support Hillary on DU . . .

Your efforts on DU certainly benefit the Clinton campaign. How are you reporting YOUR in-kind contribution?

Of course, you're not reporting it. That's because it is not true that "any service or activity that directly benefits a candidate is considered an in-kind contribution." An endorsement is NOT a contribution - regardless of how famous the endorser is or whether it comes in the form of your neighbor holding a meetup at his home, or you talking up your candidate on DU, or Arsenio Hall allowing Bill Clinton to play sax on his show or Sen. Gravel appearing on Real Time With Bill Maher or Oprah Winfrey having Obama on her show and telling the world she supports him.

Oprah's endorsement of Obama, including her hosting him on her show, is not an in-kind contribution, regardless how much you may not like it.

[sandnsea]

12. Well at least he would list them

As opposed to all the corrupt fundraising scandals the Clintons always end up in.

[rinsd]

22. Yeah Obama only has two corrupt fundraising scandals this year.

[sandnsea]

42. He's got one

admitted he made a terrible mistake and returned the money.

When did Hillary ever admit she made a mistake about anything??

[rinsd]

45. Rezko and now Hsu. That makes 2.

Obama gave the Rezko money to charity and I believe the campaign are doing the same with Hsu direct contributions while verifying money from the Paw family.

The Clinton campaign is donating the Hsu money to charity as well. The Clinton campaign has yet to comment on money from the Paw family or other seemingly Hsu related contributions.

[sandnsea]

49. Hsu belongs to Hillary - 100%

Sorry, you are not going to get away with taking THEIR contributor and smearing the rest of the party with their stench.

[Alamom]

52. He supported many democrats including Obama. Check Newsmeat.

[Alamom]

54. Ever heard of Alexi Giannoulias............

[Forkboy]

55. So if it used against Obama it's fair to use it against Hillary then.

Can't pick one or the other,has to be both or neither.

[rinsd]

58. Sure. Its just the glass houses thing gets old.

[Forkboy]

61. Yeah..it sure does....

[sandnsea]

63. Chung, Huang, Hsu, Chatwal - Four Fraudulent Fundraisers

This is classic Clinton. It's not going to work to blame other Democrats for the stink they brought in.

[rinsd]

60. LOL. Now you're pretending Hsu didn't give money to Obama or the party?

Or dozens of other Democratic candidates?

Was it all an insidious plan for Hsu to donate to Obama in 2004 and to the Hope Fund in 2005?

I love how Hillary hatred just drives people insane.

[DURHAM D]

71. She dealt with the Hsu fund raising issue immediately.

Guess you missed that Obama has money from the same guy.

Two of the other "Clinton" fund raising issues you keep mentioning and starting threads about have nothing to do with Hillary. The other one has been hacked over and hacked over without result.

[Forkboy]

56. hmmmmm...I'm sure this would concern you if it was Hillary instead.

[Capn Sunshine]

85. Naa . Talkshows are exempt.

Nothing to worry about. But that's a mighty cool couch. We'll see what good the purported "Oprah bounce" does.

Best of luck to yours and all the other candidates as well. We have a fantastic bunch of candidates.

[Doctor_J]

4. Remember the Chapelle's Show bit where Dave lucked into marrying Oprah?

don't know what made me think of that.

[Netbeavis]

9. gotcha b**** I'm rich!!!

too funny. Dave was da' man.

[Netbeavis]

5. is that why she threw Steadman out again? n/t

[hlthe2b]

19. I'm hopelessly out of the celeb news loop...

and I almost never see her show. Is it true that she and Stedman split? What's the news?

[ElizabethDC]

21. As far as I know, they're still together.n/t

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bucky]

29. Amen, Oprah! Fuck equal time! Public debates are for losers!

Tell them losers I got their Fairness Doctrine right here in my pants.

[Netbeavis]

34. as if she's such a good judge of character

she just lumped Barack in with James Frey & Rhonda Byrne. Ouch.

[jillan]

65. And don't forget her major crush on Tom Cruise.

[Forkboy]

66. Wasn't that Rosie?

Or is it both?

I tend to avoid both like the plague,so forgive me for not knowing which one it was. :)

[ElizabethDC]

74. It was Rosie. :) n/t

[DURHAM D]

75. Both - Rosie and Oprah.

Remember the couch jumping was on Oprah.

[ElizabethDC]

79. Yeah, but that wasn't because Oprah had a crush on him. n/t

[Forkboy]

82. I think I watched Rosie three or four times...

And every time she went on and on about Tom.She didn't seem to be doing it for humor,but it made me laugh anyways. :)

[ElizabethDC]

102. Yeah, she was thoroughly obsessed with Tom

she used to call him "my Tommy," and she had a song she played and everything.

[DURHAM D]

91. Oprah has the same "fake" crush on Tom that

Rosie does. Also, for the same reason.

[jillan]

81. Remember when Tom jumped on her couch?

I thought she had a thing for him - could be wrong.

[ElizabethDC]

103. He jumped on her couch because he was so "in love" with Katie

I don't think it really had anything to do with Oprah having a crush on Tom. But maybe I missed something.

[mitchtv]

35. Ever since Arnold and Maria's "Visit.".

She is dead to me

[tritsofme]

62. How does this effect network equal time requirements?

Might be best to have no candidates at all Oprah.

[BeyondGeography]

68. It doesn't...see how far the Democrats got when they bitched about Leno and Arnold

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/politicalmuscle/2006/10/democrats_deman.html

[Capn Sunshine]

86. Talkshows are exempt from Equal time

how do you think Fox gets away with that crap?

[tritsofme]

94. Fox is cable, Oprah airs on a broadcast network

Cable is exempt, talk shows may be exempt, but I've never heard about it.

[plusfiftyfive]

72. We let people be Billionaires in the USA

Does that disallow them from supporting a candidate?

AH.....you'd better ask Fox News and what's his name Rupert about THAT!

[tinrobot]

77. Election laws do prevent it.

Actually, it prevents them from giving more money/resources than what's legally allowed ($4000 ??)

But, starting with the presidential election of 2000, election laws have not been enforced, so now it's OK for people to buy offices with their money & power.

[Bongo Prophet]

104. One less disrupter, +55. REAL DUers should rejoice at the passing of FAUX supporters.

Less disruptions might mean more substantive discussions.

The moderators, in their wisdom, have dispatched with this one.

+55 was only apprentice level, and yet banged out 330+ posts, mostly egging on fights here on "the DU"
Subspecies=shit stirrer, to get 2 factions to fight each other.
Remember this when in flame wars, people pretending to be an ally may just be egging you on.

[Imagevision]

83. Oprah: "If everybody knows I'm for Barack..." exactly! she's stating her choice, smart lady!!!

those who can't handle it? - don't agree with her position? - change the channel...

[Mike Nelson]

89. What a horrible woman....

I used to have such respect for Oprah... I'm not recalling such vigor for Gore or Kerry. It might have helped. Really. having George W. Bush on her couch and not telling her viewers the truth about him... NOW, she gets all ultra political?

[Imagevision]

90. Oprah, What a horrible woman? - I'm sure Bill Clinton isn't to pleased about O's support

for Obama... msm will have to immediately start the smear machine against Oprah to calm down her followers.

[Inspired]

92. No kidding! Where was she in '04?

I think she comes across as star struck and disingenuous.

[illinoisprogressive]

96. This is the first time she is getting involved and like thousands of others

who have felt disenfranchised from politics. they have become active because of Obama.

[Desertrose]

108. I agree...I used to respect Oprah.....

I watched her way before she hit it big.

I think money,fame & power has gone completely to her head and she has NO CLUE about what the rest of the world is like.


How is it "honest" to push your chosen candidate by virtue of your power & fame?

This is a dangerous line, to have such celebrity & money get behind one candidate......completely unbalances things, which is rapidly devolving into a popularity contest even more.....

DR

[illinoisprogressive]

95. Oprah is talking with Obama's advisors about stumping for him

[Colobo]

106. She should.

[Common Sense Party]

101. In related news, Carson Daly announced that Mike Gravel will

be the ONLY candidate to appear on the Too-Late-For-Anyone-To-Watch-It Show.

Where does it end?

[cd3dem]

105. is this a good step for election reform?

honestly, how would people react if Jay Leno said he would only have Fred Thompson on the tonight show...

how would people react if Letterman said, "only Hillary."

does Obama think this is good for politics? I am sure he knows the free TV time is good for him but is it good for politics in general?

does it matter if you are an Obama supporter as to how you answer this?

[Cha]

107. That's fine...better than

fucking swartzennegger. I must say her choices are getting better than letting that fascistpig gw bush kiss her.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

109. It seems pretty obvious that a candidate...

endorsed by a popular TV personality, who is then given an exclusive platform on that entertainer's show gains a value to their campaign. Oprah's endorsement, alone, is very influential ... she has turned unknown authors into bestsellers, overnight. As a citizen, she can endorse whomever ... but then showcasing that candidate on her widely watched show seems a bit illegitimate.