The Michael Jackson Circus Redux

Just watch...

I can already see it happening...

The Circus that was the life of Michael Jackson will return in a tour de force now that he's dead.

His family will (very publicly) fight over his will; his funeral will be a media frenzy; his ex-wife will want a cut of the pie; Sony Music will demand BILLIONS for Jackson's share of copyrights; his dad will make a spectacular fool of himself [once again];

his brothers and sisters will use his death to make themselves richer by preying off his name; his kids will be hounded by the paparazzi who will document every action they make; accusations will fly; Jackson's mother will make demands regarding Michaels Estate; the will will end up in court, contested by every family member and slimeball wanting a piece of the Michael Jackson pie; and on, and on, and on.

The new Circus is just beginning, and it will be a pathetic display of manipulation, disgusting greed, and self-serving interests.

Now, let's see just how much of this comes about....

Hypocrites and Michael Jackson

(I'm probably going to take some heat for this one; but truth is still truth...even if you don't want to hear it.)

How soon we forget...

First he was a MoTown sensation.

Then he was a Pop Music genius.

Then he was called "The King of Pop."

Then he started getting "weird."

Then we heard rumors of increasing and disturbing peculiarities regarding children at his Neverland Ranch.

Then he was charged with [basically] pedophilia.

Then, after exhoneration, he fled the country in shame.

The press hounded and derided him. Tabloids called him "Wacko Jacko." Pretty much everyone with any sense distanced themselves from him. His financial empire crumbled faster than any of Jesse Jackson's presidential campaigns. His life was pretty much in ruins, and nobody seemed to care.

Then, on June 25th of this year, Michael Jackson died suddenly, unexpectedly from an apparent cardiac arrest at the age of 50.

Suddenly, a media transformation ocurred. Gone were the accusations, intimations, and derisions. In death, Michael Jackson had gone from a humorless joke to beloved pop icon once again. The "world" is suddenly praising the man who once had familially unrelated children sleeping with him in his bed.

Don't get me wrong here--I'm truly sorry that his kids are now without their father; that his family is undoubtedly heartbroken by his death. I really am.

However, the same press and other detractors who once made fun of Michael Jackson every chance they could, are now praising him for his impact of popular music, and the legacy he leaves behind. They cannot say enough good about the man.

I only have one word for these writers and commentators, and that word is "Hypocrites." That is exactly what these folks are. It was just fine to tear him down in life, and point out his abundant falacies; but in death,...well...everything is forgiven...right? We'll forget about the humiliating public scandals, and his trial for pediphilic activities. We'll just ignore the remembrances of holding his infant out over a hotel balconey railing some 5 stories up showing the kid off to the press; or how he brought humiliation and derisive commentaries upon his children by parading them around in full bhurka-type clothing.

Naahhh...all that stuff doesn't matter any more because we'll only remember all the good things about Michael Jackson. Things like...Let's see...Thriller (the video and the song)...ummm...Billie Jean (and some illegitimate child)... and ummmmm....the moonwalk...and.....oh yeah--how cute he was as a young member of the Jackson 5...and.... well,...hmmmm...nope, that's really about all. The rest is really all about weirdness, scandal, and, well, more weirdness.

I sincerely appreciate what Michael Jackson contributed to Pop Music. Even though he hasn't had a certifiable hit single in over twenty years, his impact on the music industry can be felt to this day. Musically, he'll be remember for years to come.

But unlike so many other icons who died early (Buddy Holly, Richie Valens, Elvis Presley, Freddie Mercury), Michael Jackson will not just be remembered for his music. He'll be remembered for all the things in his life that went wrong; that hindered or stalled his career; that brought shame upon himself, and his family. Not exactly a legacy I would be proud of; but one that is there nonetheless...even if the world press chooses to hypocritize themselves by praising the same man they once splashed so many disturbing headlines about all across their front pages.

A New Direction in International Relations

Historically, the Department of State (informally known as The State Department) follows the lead of the President in our relations with other countries. The President is the one who sets the tone and intention of the diplomatic emphasis of the State Dept.


Under George W. Bush, the general tone of the diplomacy coming out of D.C. was adversarial at the least. Following the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, President Bush, in attempting to form a coalition of states with which to make war on Afghanistan and the Iraq, made the statement that governments were “either with us, or against us.” This easily, readily defined the International Relations tone of the United States, and the Secretary of State was the face of this aggressive rhetoric.


This hard-line diplomacy was met with skepticism both domestically and abroad. The 'join us or you’re our enemy' tactic was, I feel, poorly advised, and executed even worse. For decades the USA has been the model of diplomacy, and of the democratic process. Countries wanted to be like us. Over the course of GW Bush’s two terms, many solid allies began to question the real intent of the United States. Where before we had been a leader, many countries now began to see us as the big bully who would threaten you if you went against our wishes. Decades-long friendships were in jeopardy, or lost all-together.

I think that for a number of countries, the end of President Bush’s time in office couldn’t have come any sooner. Diplomatically, the US was in a deep hole; and it had a multitude of fences to mend with allies, with estranged governments, and potential enemies.


The choice of Hillary Clinton (By President Barack Obama) as the new Secretary of State was a wise decision. Her former experience as First Lady, and as a New York Senator has proven to be invaluable; and unlike her predecessor, Mrs. Clinton has the tact required to actually engage in constructive diplomatic efforts.


In his recent trip to the Middle East, President Obama set a new tone regarding the intent of the United States in its relations with the world. Gone are the adversarial tone and actions of the former Administration. Instead of it being us against the world, President Obama is looking on Secretary Clinton to heal the wounds caused by the Bush policies, and to open actual dialogue with governments that have, over the last 8 years, been treated as enemies.


President Obama’s speech in Cairo really let the world know that change is coming. He wants to assure world leaders that the policies of the GW Bush Administration are gone, and that the USA no longer views things as “with us, or against us.” It is a long time coming, and I am hopeful that the new approach works as well as President Obama hopes. Though we are the world leader in many regards, even the US cannot stand alone. I can only hope that Secretary Clinton can show world leaders how much we all need each other, and how much the future depends on this new diplomatic approach.

The "Offensive" US Flag???!

Political Correctness has now reached complete lunacy. Last week a nursing supervisor in Houston had a flag of the United States removed from her office (without her consent) because someone [who worked in the hospital] was actually offended by the flag. Yeah...you read that right...someone was offended by the US flag!

The hospital, seemingly desperate to conform to a single complaint, didn't even wait to inform the supervisor--they went into her office, took the flag down, rolled it up (not folding it as stipulated by regulation), and left it on the floor of her office (a complete disrespect of the flag)! The reason? Because a female employee, who is an immigrant of fourteen years, decided that the display of Old Glory was offensive!

What the FRACK??!!!

This one completely boggles my mind! I cannot even begin to comprehend how this woman could possibly be offended by the universally recognized symbol of these United States of America--the country she immigrated to; the country she lives in; the country that gives her the freedom to live her life in any way she chooses. I just don't get it.

We, as a people, should be up in arms over this one. It's not as if we're talking religion, bibles in the classroom, homosexual equality, animal rights, or anything of the sort. This is about a single person deciding they were offended by the flag of their chosen country, and about the whoosie hospital administrators who actually agreed with the complaint enough to disrespect the flag by not only rolling it up, but also by leaving it on the ground.

PC-ness run amok is an understatement here. The Administrators should lose their jobs, and the complainant should get over herself. The supervisors personal rights were trampled on. She deserves praise for showing her patriotism--not vilification. This whole thing stinks a stink so intense that even the ACLU would be crying for mercy.

I am proud of the history of the United States! I am proud of my Citizenship! I am proud to see our Flag and all that it represents. I say, God Bless the United States of America!!!

Why I Won't Watch The NBA Anymore

Well, the NBA Finals are here once again, and it is yet another year I won't be watching. Why? First, because the Lakers are in it...again...(BORING!). Second, because I don't feel that NBA stands for National Basketball Association any more. Nope. I think the more appropriate name would be the National Basket-BRAWL Association.

You see, there was a time not so long ago (i.e. pre-Detroit Pistons of the late 80's/early 90's) when the NBA maketed a game based on actual skill...not on how brutal a player can be against another before getting called for a fowl.

I know that some of you out there are going to whine and say the game has changed; blah, blah, blah. As far as I am aware, the rules are still the same; it's the enforcement of the rules that has changed.

It used to be on free throws that no player could step into the lane prior to the ball leaving the hands of the shooter. If they did, it was a lane violation--usually a team foul. In today's game, as soon the shooter begins a shooting motion of any kind, we are seeing players crowding the lane, jockeying for the best rebounding position.

How many steps are involved in a traveling violation? Well todays players would have you believe it to be at least 4 or 5 steps. In actuality, the rules stipulate two steps (while holding the ball) are legal. A third constitutes a Traveling violation.

Lastly (or at least, the last of what I'm highlighting), placing your hand/arm on an opposing player's back used to be an automatic defensive foul. In order to defend, you relied on footspeed, non-contact arm waving, and mental anticipation of what to expect of the player you were defending against. In today's basket-brawl, we see players leaning into opponents, placing whole forearms on a back, and simply pushing an offensive player around. No skill is required...just brute strength/force, and the officials not caring that fouls are being committed all over the court.

These examples are just the surface of a game that has almost entirely lost its identity as a performance of actual skill. Instead of strategy and finesse, we see pushing, shoving, throwing players to the floor, flopping, brutal elbows, slapping, whining, and the disgusting "I didn't do anything!" attitude now permeating nearly every professional sport.

The NBA admits that it has an image problem. It knows that gate receipts are down, merchandizing income is low, and owners are so hungry for a winning team that coaches are on a revolving platform as they get shuffled in and out faster than Mark Cuban can accrue fines.

(Did you know that in the 21 years Jerry Sloan has managed the Utah Jazz, there have been over 250 Head Coaching changes throughout the rest of the NBA?--an unbelieveable stat!)

Commisioner David Stern does nothing to solve the real issues that are damaging Professional Basketball. He looks at ratings, marketing, and the next big wave to further elevate the business. What would happen if actual skill was expected of players entering the league; or that the NBA employed refs that actually enforced the rules of the game; or players actually stopped whining about whatever babyish thing, and actually learned to play basket-BALL?

It would be a joy to watch the game once again. It would be fun! But I also think that the fans of today have gotten so used to the brutality of basket-BRAWL that a game of actual skill would be boring to most people. Too bad on that, because the truly great teams of years gone-by relied on skill--a concept now almost completely lost.

Cheney, Still Being (a) DICK

When is someone going to shut DICK Cheney up? The man has not been Vice President for nearly six months, and he is still acting like he's in Office.

His pal, Georgie Dubya had the wherewith all to leave the governance of the United States to his successor. DICK still thinks that he can push everyone around just like he did during the tragic former Administration.

The RNC needs to put a muzzle on this Republican malcontent, so the Obama Administration can go about righting the wrongs that DICK and friends created. If they don't, discord will be sown amongst the Congressional Leadership...but, maybe that's just what DICK wants.

In any event, the FORMER Veep's publicized rants need to desist or the efforts of the current Administration to fix this country will be frustrated by a splintering, partisan Congress, and the path towards a better future will be lost.

Obama Vs Bush in Two Points

Just under five months into the Obama Administration and we're already seeing differences in approaches and policy. The Department of the Interior administers the National Parks, Natural Resources, etc of the United States. My purpose today is to illustrate two of the major differences between Obama and Georgie Dubya Bushie.

During the Bush years, it was a cowardly, but common practice to make announcements regarding both small and sweeping environmental policy changes either in the middle of the night, or during long holiday weekends. This afforded the Administration the ability to basically minimize the impact of changes because when these announcements were made, there were few (if any) reporters at the West Wing.

By the time it was better known, other news stories, having more precedence in the media, would break, and the policy changes would get swept away unnoticed. By the time anyone did notice, it was too late for any outcry, thus allowing the changes to move forward—usually without Congressional or Public comment.

So far, the Obama Administration is strongly avoiding this practice by conducting high-profile announcements in the middle of the day such as Sec. Salazar’s recent announcement (at Red Rocks Natl. Conservation area) regarding “$305 million [that] will fund more than 650 Bureau of Land Management projects across the country under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The investments will restore landscapes and habitat; spur renewable energy development on public lands, and create jobs.” (Dept of Int. website) The method of announcement was clearly, loudly a departure from Bush Administration tactics.

Next, the coal industry has had a financial hey-day the last eight years due to loosened regulations regarding recovery of coal from the Appalachian Mountains. Historically, tunnels were dug spider web fashion to extricate the maximum amount of coal possible.

However, “Topping” has become a faster, less costly method. Instead of digging tunnels, the tops of mountains are literally blown away, and crews can dig open pits to access the coal easier, and with less danger.

The drawbacks? All waste is generally dumped into valleys adjacent to the mine, and the coal companies have not been made responsible for the environmental and aesthetic damage caused by this method of mining. Streams are polluted, aquifers and watersheds damaged, and gigantic holes are left where mountains once stood.

The caveat in this whole thing was the accelerated approval process for such mining which reduced or eliminated environmental review for each application. The last I read, more than 1200 mountains had been topped, with applications pending for some 1500 more.

As soon as the Obama Administration began, the permitting process slowed to a crawl, and a review ordered of past issuances in Topping permits. While the practice continues (based on issued permits), the future of this type of mining is in doubt as actual environmental reviews proceed, and the long-term impacts are determined.

So, the question comes to this—Is the Obama Administration differing its approach to the running of the Dept of the Interior from that of the GW Bush Administration? The answer is a simple, “Yes.” The GW Bush Administration was secretive and covert in its approach to environmental policy; often executing critical changes to laws/regulations that legally required public comment. It allowed the acceleration of permitting for Mt. Topping in the Appalachians while blatantly ignoring the devastating environmental impacts it would create.

Meanwhile, President Barak Obama seems to be fulfilling his promise of a more open government though very public announcements, and by actually reviewing the permitting processes used by the former Administration in regards to coal mining. He is showing the American people that he cares about the damage caused by the former leadership. These two men (and their methods) couldn’t be more diametrically opposed.

Local Observations About This Recession

I'm seeing probably my 3rd or 4th severe recession. As I look back over the previous economic problems versus today's, I can't help but notice some strong differences amongst the general population that I haven't seen before.

Now, I don't know if that is because I live in an area that I have not previously experienced recession before, or if what I'm seeing is reflective of a national attitude. Let's get started...

First, as I look around I am seeing far more unnecessary debt. By that I mean that there are more people who are buying 'toys' simply for the sake of having them--not because these things are needed; but because they are simply wanted...desired (for lack of a better word). 'Toys' can range from seldom used snowmobiles to one car for every person in a household; from always having the newest, coolest video game console to being obsessed with owning the latest in telecommunications technologies (phones, blackberry's, etc); from flashy but useless automobile gadgets to showing friends your monstrous new 100" HDTV. It's as if we aren't satisfied with what we've got...we simply want to have more stuff than our neighbors.

Next, during the previous downturns, the number of cars on the roads dropped dramatically as commuters would carpool, and weekly household errands were done in one trip. Since the crash last Fall, I have not seen a decrease of traffic on my local roads. There seems to be no increase of carpooling or even public education about carpools; no increase in mass transit options or availability.

How about dining out? In my experience, during recession, the foot traffic at grocery stores increases dramatically, while restaurants see a significant drop-off in weekly sales. With the current recession, the restaurants around where I live are just as busy as every; while the grocery stores aren't any busier than a year ago--a real paradox when you stop to consider that people historically are extremely proactive about saving every penney when things get tough.

In decades past, it was rare to see someone actually pay for anything with a credit card. I'm not talking about a debit/cc, but a real CREDIT card. Today, the average american household has about $5500 in credit card debt; that is, the amount of monies owed to a credit lender (plus fees, interest, etc).There are far more people living on money they don't have than I have ever seen before. Pretty scary when you stop to think that literally everything you own could be taken away from you because you defaulted on your credit payments.

Lastly, I recently read an article which stated that the average american is only saving a fraction of their income compared to even ten years ago. We are spending nearly everything we are earning! The post-baby boomer generation has no way to pay for retirement. Why? Because they are spending at an unprecedented rate, driving up inflationary numbers far higher than they should be, and causing economic upheaval on a scale never before seen.

Yes, there are a great number of varying factors which formulate the economic impact we are feeling today; and what has been described here is but a cog in a HUGE wheel; but, these thing are indeed new to this recession. They have contributed, and they will continue to contribute to a fading economy so long as we (the spending public) continue on our reckless course towards financial devastation.

It's time we asked ourselves what we are doing every day that is adding to the economic woes besetting our country; and by so asking, knowing what we must do and then enacting those things which will strengthen our individual viability. Only then can we begin to add our small part to the huge economic wheel which we are all a part of; and the upkeep of which we are all responsible for.