Ellen DeGeneres Shows a Rare Moment of Solidarity With Her Hollywood Archenemy
It's no secret that there's been no love lost between DeGeneres and Rosie O'Donnell, but the former Ellen star appears to be extending an olive branch. It's a surprising move, but possibly a welcome one, amid Donald Trump's claim that he was 'giving serious consideration' to revoking O'Donnell's U.S. citizenship. O'Donnell currently lives in Ireland with their child, Clay, 12.
More from SheKnows
Donald Trump's Granddaughter Kai Reveals Her Grandfather's Most Influential Advice
DeGeneres decided to enter the chat with an Instagram post on July 13. She shared the president's initial threat from Truth Social and O'Donnell's response — both were posted on July 12. The former talk show host kept her thoughts rather simple, but she made sure to tag O'Donnell so that she would see the message.
'Good for you @rosie,' wrote DeGeneres in the caption.
The comedians' feud goes back to 1998 on Larry King Live when DeGeneres made a surprising comment about O'Donnell.
'I don't know Rosie. We're not friends,' DeGeneres told the late talk show host. O'Donnell was never invited on The Ellen DeGeneres Show, and it wasn't until 2023 that she received a text with an apology.
'[DeGeneres] wrote, 'I'm really sorry and I don't remember that.' I guess she saw me talk about it on Andy Cohen's show [Watch What Happens Live]. I remembered it so well; I had T-shirts printed and I gave them to my staff that said 'I don't know Rosie. We're not friends.' I have a picture of her holding [my then-infant son] Parker,' O'Donnell told The Hollywood Reporter. 'I know her mother. I could identify her brother without her in the room. I knew her for so many years. It just felt like I don't trust this person to be in my world.'
DeGeneres has also been accused of not supporting other female comedians, including Kathy Griffin and Margaret Cho. So, it's not just an O'Donnell-exclusive issue.
DeGeneres eventually addressed her damaged reputation in her 2024 Netflix special, Ellen DeGeneres: For Your Approval.
'Yeah, the 'be kind' girl wasn't kind, that was the headline,' she said. 'Here's the problem: I'm a comedian who got a talk show, and I ended the show every day by saying, 'Be kind to one another.' Had I ended my show by saying, 'Go f—k yourselves,' people would've been pleasantly surprised to find out I'm kind.'Best of SheKnows
28 Lesbian Couples in Hollywood With Our Favorite Love Stories
Every Single Look Kate Middleton Has Worn to Wimbledon Since 2007
Every Single Time Kate Middleton's Royal Fashion Made Us Stop in Our Tracks
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Records reveal how Palace tried to secure show of support for a new royal yacht
Backstairs manoeuvring by Buckingham Palace officials as ministers agonised over whether to order a replacement for the Royal Yacht Britannia is laid bare in newly released official files. By 1993 it was apparent that, after 39 years, Britannia was reaching the end of its life, but John Major's Conservative government had yet to decide whether to invest in a new yacht at an estimated cost of £50 million. It was widely thought Queen Elizabeth II strongly favoured the commissioning of a new yacht but the royal family could not afford to be seen to be trying to influence political decision-making. However files released by the National Archives at Kew, west London, show that senior courtiers privately approached No 10 to see if the prime minister would make a Commons statement stressing Britannia's 'inestimable value' to the nation. But the plan – which amounted to a thinly veiled show of support for a new yacht – was scotched by the Cabinet Office, which warned that any such comments would be highly 'prejudicial'. One senior official noted caustically that a claim by the Palace that the Queen was 'indifferent' as to the outcome of a review of the yacht's future 'hardly rings true'. The issue of a new yacht came at an extremely difficult time for the government and for the Palace, with support for the royals at a low ebb. There had been an angry public backlash the previous year when ministers announced the taxpayer would pick up the bill – which eventually ran to £36 million – for the restoration of Windsor Castle following a catastrophic fire. In the aftermath of her 'annus horribilis' – which also saw the separation of Charles and Diana – the Queen agreed that she would for the first time pay taxes. With Mr Major due to announce the historic move in a statement to parliament, the Queen's private secretary Sir Robert Fellowes saw an opportunity to secure what would amount to a show of support for a new yacht. He asked the prime minister's principal private secretary Alex Allan if Mr Major would insert a passage referring to the importance of Britannia as well as the Queen's flight and the royal train. He suggested the prime minister should tell MPs that it was not just a question of cost 'but also the style in which we wish our head of state and members of the royal family to represent us' in their public duties. 'It is always difficult to put a price on prestige but I have no doubt that over the years these items have been of inestimable value to this country.' Sir Robin's proposed addition to Mr Major's statement went on: 'I would also like to make clear that there is not, and never has been, any pressure from the Queen to build a replacement for HMY Britannia. 'Should the government decide it is in the national interest for the yacht to be replaced that would be of course another matter.' However, Nicolas Bevan, the official heading the working group set up to consider the future of the yacht, warned that the proposed remarks could be 'prejudicial' to any future decisions. 'For example to say that the royal yacht has been of inestimable value to this country will not be a helpful remark if ministers in due course decide not to replace Britannia,' he said. 'Equally it hardly rings true to suggest that it is a matter of complete indifference to the Queen as to whether Britannia is replaced or not.' Despite the palace's protestations of neutrality, the files suggest courtiers were involved in what amounted to some none too subtle lobbying on behalf of a new yacht. On May 13 1993, senior government officials, led by the cabinet secretary Sir Robin Butler, were invited to a 'splendid lunch' on board Britannia where they were regaled by the former lord mayor of London, Sir Hugh Bidwell, and the Earl of Limerick, a senior banker, on the value of the yacht to UK business. Expressing his thanks afterwards to the master of the Queen's household, Major General Sir Simon Cooper, Sir Robin noted that the setting had 'brought home the issues to those involved in a unique way'. However, when news of the meeting leaked out, government press officers were instructed to impress upon journalists – unattributably – that the Queen and royal family were 'not fighting any kind of rearguard action on the yacht'. Despite misgivings over the costs, the Major government finally announced in January 1997 that they would build a replacement yacht if they were returned to power in the general election later that year. The move was however widely interpreted as a desperate attempt to shore up support among wavering Tory voters, and when Labour was swept to power in a landslide they promptly reversed the decision. When Britannia was finally decommissioned – after returning the last governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patten, following the handover to China – the Queen, who rarely displayed any emotion in public, was seen to shed a tear.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Sam Ryder champions increased access to live music
Greene King Pubs has appointed singer, songwriter and producer, Sam Ryder as its 'Head of Gigs' in a bid to get the UK rocking, by increasing access to live music and finding the country's best grassroots talent this summer. As part of the role, Sam will surprise customers at one Greene King pub for a one-off headline performance (Friday 8 August).
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
The possible pension changes that workers need to know about
After nearly 20 years, the government is bringing back the Pensions Commission to tackle the growing threat of retirement poverty. Ministers are set to resurrect a commission after nearly 20 years in a bid to reform the UK's pension system, amid fears that many of today's workers face poverty in retirement. Experts warn people looking to retire in 2050 are on course to receive £800 per year less than current pensioners, while 45% of working-age adults are putting nothing into their pensions, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) said. With this in mind, work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall is now turning to the Pensions Commission, which last met in 2006, to 'tackle the barriers that stop too many saving in the first place'. 'The original Pensions Commission helped get pension saving up and pensioner poverty down," said Pensions minister Torsten Bell. 'If we carry on as we are, tomorrow's retirees risk being poorer than today's." The commission's work marks the second phase of a wide-reaching government review into the pensions system, the first half of which looked at investment and how to ensure "greater returns" for savers. Phase two will focus on improving pension adequacy. Kendall also confirmed that the next statutory government review into when and how to raise the state pension age will start work now. Here, Yahoo News takes a look at what changes we could expect the Pensions Commission to consider. What is the Pensions Commission? The original Pensions Commission was set up in 2002 and is regarded as having huge influence over the UK's pension landscape. Among the most significant reforms resulting from its work are the automatic enrolment onto workplace pensions and the reduction of qualifying years for the full basic state pension to 30 years for men and women. The Resolution Foundation said the commission has "already transformed living standards for current and future pensioners for the better", but that "the job is not yet complete". In particular, the think tank calls on the new commission to boost "future generations' living standards in retirement" and tackle the "equally pressing 'rainy day' savings challenge people face today". Below are some changes we could expect the commission to consider. Changes to auto enrolment While we don't know exactly what the commission will recommend, it is expected to look at ways of widening the scope of automatic enrolment. The Resolution Foundation said the current "one-size fits all system" is in need of reform, adding: "Some low-earners may be saving more than they can afford, or need to, while others – particularly middle and higher earners – are still saving too little." Analysis by the think tank finds that under the current State Pension and auto enrolment policy with an 8% default contribution rate, the typical earner can expect to replace just 51% of their pre-retirement earnings. The commission will have to balance this challenge with the present-day needs of workers with families, one-in-three of whom have savings of less than £1,000, the foundation said, stressing the need for "greater flexibility". The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) proposes increases in default contributions be "targeted at middle and higher earners". "In addition, pension participation should be extended by providing employer contributions to almost all employees, even those who do not make an employee contribution," the think tank adds. Suggesting that there is a balance to be struck, Helen Morrissey, head of retirement analysis at Hargreaves Lansdown told Yahoo News: "We don't want to be in a position where lower earners see their contributions hiked to the extent that they struggle in the here and now. "Similarly, we don't want higher earners to save at minimum levels and receive a nasty shock when they get to retirement and realise their pension will not sustain the lifestyle they have been used to." Under current workplace pension auto enrolment rules, 8% of an employee's eligible earnings go towards their pension – 5% from the employee, and the employer adding 3%. Encouraging self-employed to save for retirement Morrissey said the commission also needs to decide "how to get groups such as the self-employed to save more for retirement". Self-employed people aren't covered by auto enrolment, don't benefit from employer contribution, and may be hesitant to put money away until at least the age of 55 due to volatile earnings, she added. For this reason, economists have suggested that the commission could consider finding a way to bring the self-employed into the auto enrolment system. One solution made last year by David Sturrock, a senior research economist at the IFS, is for self-employed people to be given an active choice over whether to save into a pension or LISA (lifetime ISA) when filing their tax returns. Another option, he said, would be for the government to enrol them automatically into a long-term savings plan, from which they could opt out. Triple lock 'out of scope' Liz Kendall has confirmed the commission will not be looking at changes to the triple lock on state pensions. The triple lock is a mechanism that means state pensions will rise every year by 2.5%, CPI inflation, or the rise in average earnings, whichever is highest. 'The triple lock is out of scope of the commission. We've got a very clear commitment to that for the entirety of this Parliament," the work and pensions secretary said. 'And what we're asking the commission to do is genuinely look medium to longer term, the middle of this century, and how the state pension and second pensions work together.' Improving adequacy and equality With four in 10 working age adults not on track to meet the target retirement income (two-thirds of pre-retirement pay), the commission will be looking at ways to improve this figure. DWP analysis suggests 15 million people were under-saving for retirement – particularly the self-employed, lower earners and some ethnic minorities. Only a quarter of people on low pay in the private sector and the same proportion from Pakistani or Bangladeshi backgrounds are saving. Women face a significant gender pensions gap, with those approaching retirement in line to receive barely half the income that men can expect, the commission's terms of reference says, suggesting that bridging these gaps will also be on the commission's agenda. Morrisey said the Commission's work can "give the government the opportunity to take a long-term view and look at how the state pension and the triple lock's role within it need to evolve to ensure it remains sustainable and people can plan for their futures with confidence". One potential reform she suggests is the use of a Living Pension, similar to a Living Wage, as a "minimum income underpin" with targeted salary replacement rates over this to ensure people meet adequate saving targets. Tom Selby, director of public policy at AJ Bell, suggests the government could be limited, telling Yahoo News: "It is hard to imagine hiking minimum contributions – hitting employers and employees in the pocket in the short term – will be on the agenda during this Parliament." AJ Bell's head of public policy Rachel Vahey warned: "Raising employer contribution requirements would likely face a business backlash, with employers having recently shouldered huge rises in the minimum wage and an extra £25bn a year in national insurance costs." Read more Small pension pot rules and loopholes: what are they and how do they work? (The Telegraph) People need an annual income of £44,000 in retirement for comfortable lifestyle (Daily Record) 'I retired to Spain and live on the state pension. I could never afford it in Britain' (The Telegraph) Solve the daily Crossword
