Reply
Thu 24 Apr, 2003 12:42 pm
There really ought to be an entire section on this guy, but nevertheless, did anyone see the glimpse of Michael Jacksons kid, Prince Michael Jackson I, on TV. The Queen of Englands got more black in her than this kid, which means of course that Miss Michael Jackson is not the father of the kid and probably not of any of the other two either. So, that means that Michael Jackson adopted the children. Not there is anything wrong with being gay, as I am, but considering that the singer is gay and a pedophile, you'd think the California authorities would think twice about letting a single, cross-dressing, child dangling, bizarre, gay pedophile from adopting three children. It's funny, I'm as normal as can be and I can't adopt a child. It must be that money can grease the skids even when it comes to the welfare of three innocent children. The whole thing makes me sick. Think about what those kids are going to have to go thru when they're teenagers. It's a great pity.
I bet he lost his testicles in a freak super-soaker accident involving LaToya 12 years ago.
I have this idea that LaToya and Michael are the same person. She seems a little stabler though. Of course, as they say, has anyone ever seen them together in the same room?
I have this idea that LaToya and Michael are the same person. She seems a little stabler though. Of course, as they say, has anyone ever seen them together in the same room?
I wish I could get a residual payment for everytime one of you "normal" people gets his superior groove on by watching every minute of the latest Michael Jackson expose'.
Oh man, oh wow, he's so weird, oh wow. This country's media thrives on the fine fickle line between adulation and immolation - we build them up to unreal proportions, then take sick glee out of joining in the stoning when they cross that fine line. We believe what we want, because we really don't know - that's why a burnt out slime like Ozzy Osbourne is making Pepsi commercials.
But go ahead - take your time, get in line and rake him across the coals with the most heat you can muster. And don't forget to qualify it with "Well, not that I really care, and I don't really watch those shows, and I think the magazines and TV shows about him are stupid, BUT..."
And I'll just continue to remember that most of us have a weird family member or neighbor, and that Michael Jackson's music will be spinning on after all of us are completely forgotten.
NEXT??
Could MJ become a surrogate mother?
Snood, Mikey is a weird unit and ought to have his dick cut off if he is indeed molesting children, but I can separate his art from that just as I can separate the art(?) of the Dixie Chicks or Susan and Tim from their political views.
I like a lot of his work, but if I were faced with the choice of leaving the kids with either him or Charles Manson while squinney and I went out for the evening I'd be hard pressed.
I think when you get into pedophilia, real or alleged, you're in a completely separate arena from a weird neighbor or a burnt out slimy heavy metal guy selling Pepsi.
I agree that we feed the fire by watching. I have not seen a Michael Jackson special, only snippets.
I personally feel he is the black communities version of Elvis. Both charismatic talented individuals who became caricatures of themselves and got so out there that everyone forgot their accomplishments. The word that comes to mind thinking of either of them is waste. It's really sad.
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:Snood, Mikey is a weird unit and ought to have his dick cut off if he is indeed molesting children, but I can separate his art from that just as I can separate the art(?) of the Dixie Chicks or Susan and Tim from their political views.
I like a lot of his work, but if I were faced with the choice of leaving the kids with either him or Charles Manson while squinney and I went out for the evening I'd be hard pressed.
I think when you get into pedophilia, real or alleged, you're in a completely separate arena from a weird neighbor or a burnt out slimy heavy metal guy selling Pepsi.
I agree that we feed the fire by watching. I have not seen a Michael Jackson special, only snippets.
I personally feel he is the black communities version of Elvis. Both charismatic talented individuals who became caricatures of themselves and got so out there that everyone forgot their accomplishments. The word that comes to mind thinking of either of them is waste. It's really sad.
I haven't disputed his weirdness.
But there's very little chance you or any of the rest of us is going to have to be faced with the options you mentioned for child daycare, so you needn't fret about that. And there's very little to be gained from the mewling "ain't he awful" parties that are so popular. It's true, as you said , that it's "sad". He was a good looking, talented young man once. I don't know and don't really care to know how bad or good he is, and I certainly don't condone hurting children. What's sadder is the self-righteous on the one hand, and the sensationalist ambulance chasers on the other, who just can't get their damned fill of it, or stop blathering about it.
Snood<
The "sensationalistic ambulance chasers," as you call them, have been around centuries before the gasoline engine that powers the ambulances was ever created.
You have every reason to be opinionated regarding this form of journalism. Often, it is not very fair; often it is sleazy. Some people, though, thrive on reading and viewing this sort of "news."
The tabloids often block the entrances to check-out aisles at supermarkets -- and like a presence of a naked lady, you just have to look at the covers. You may see only front pages, but millions of people throughout the world love this sort of writing and read beyond the covers.
Television has found the "sleaze factor" very popular and has transformed the printed tabloid to a televised one. Ratings for these shows always seem to do well.
Even so, Snood, you do not have to like, or watch, what used to be called "yellow" journalism. Thankfully, though, we live in a country where freedom of speech and expression are a truism for all its citizens. You can refrain from watching the current Michael Jackson media frenzy and be very appalled by it.
The fact is, though, people in the United States have watched Mr. Jackson as an artist since he was a young boy to the middle-aged man that time has made him become. These people have watched his TV shows, attended his concerts, spent millions on his recordings, and packed his "live" performances.
They have a vested interest in the Michael Jackson persona, often to the point of being voyeuristic. Many people have tried, to no avail, to stop journalism that is somewhat trashy. They haven't succeeded, nor will they, as long as the First Amendment is in place.
The free-flow of ideas is what makes our nation strong. It keeps checks and balances on the government and allows dissent to flourish where it might otherwise be banned.
I'm not sure I welcome all this Michael Jackson coverage. Bi-Polar Bear has written a post (above) with which I strongly agree. But, Snood, you or anybody else in the nation has the freedom to hold an opposite opinion.
And, I think, that opinion is respected here.[/i]
Actually, I don't think Snood and I are that far off from one another on the way we feel about this.
I think Michael Jackson, like Paul McCartney, died a long, long time ago.
Official Inventory:
Opinions - all accounted for
Assholes - equal number
Okay, it's now verified we all have one of both!!!!
Quote: It must be that money can grease the skids even when it comes to the welfare of three innocent children. The whole thing makes me sick. Think about what those kids are going to have to go thru when they're teenagers. It's a great pity
You got that right.
Paula Poundstone comes to mind as well as one who shouldn't have kids, but does.
Hey, snood. I have (literally) grown up with MJ as we are the same age and I used to work in his 'hood, Gary, Indiana.
Yeah, he's got a freak on, but your right, we all know somebody or are related to somebody that's got a freak on too.
But let me point something out to you.
Isn't it intellectually dishonest to defend Michael Jackson against allegations that he is unfit to be a parent and is one strictly because of his money, and yet derail conservatives for their equally egregious acts of influence?
Just wonderin'........
"Isn't it intellectually dishonest to defend Michael Jackson against allegations that he is unfit to be a parent and is one strictly because of his money, and yet derail conservatives for their equally egregious acts of influence? "
Interesting question ... now here's one for you -
Can you show me where I defended MJ against any allegations, or accused conservatives of equivalent ones?
It's funny ,but when it comes to creativity, some things get created far long before they actually become an reality. I think the Micheal Jackson saga will become one of the greatest stories ever told, much in the vein of The Phantom of the Opera. Micheal has become that Phantom. Imagine in the future 100 years from now...... Broadway North, because NYC's Broadway will be under water, from the polar Ice caps having melted. And there playing Micheal Jackson Phantom of the Mellenia.
Opinions-accounted for
assholes-ditto
both all stink except mine.....
just wanted to set the record straight
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:Opinions-accounted for
assholes-ditto
both all stink except mine.....
just wanted to set the record straight
damn. wish I'd said that.
Don't worry snood, you will.
damn. wish I'd said that , too.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace