Posted on 07/06/2009 6:19:17 AM PDT by tobyhill
That’s your opinion and I have and stand by mine. Instead of wasting his breath on a non-issue, he could have been doing something productive.
So, his words are going to stop child molesters? Where has he been on Barney Frank? Or how about speaking out about the moral ills of picking up men in restrooms, or driving young women over bridges and allowing them to die? Nah, we’ll just elect and work with those people.
If we was proposing a law, or something proactive, it’s totally different than making a statement. Yay, he made a statement. I’m sure some pedophile somewhere stopped molesting the little boy he just kidnapped because Peter King spoke out about Michael Jackson.
Words do and mean nothing.
Again, the coverage may not wane, but instead of Peter King doing something worthwhile to have his name in the news, he chose to make a statement about a celebrity. It’s too bad he wasn’t able to find a microphone to throw himself in front of when Brittany Spears drove with her young son on her lap. I’m sure his words could have saved some child from going through a windshield too.
Rep. Peter King said Jackson -- whom he called a "low-life" -- is being glorified in the days after his death while society ignores the efforts, of teachers, police officers, firefighters and veterans.
Ping
The worst thing about America is our Pop Culture. I mean the People magazine celebrity worship culture. It is so pervasive, it got us an ultra left wing, America hating President.
I get so little for my cable bill too - this non-stop pervert coverage is adding insult to injury.
Transcript of Bashir interview. Video of it also.
Excerpt:
Bashir: "Did you ever sleep in the bed with them?"
Jackson: "No. But I have slept in a bed with many children. "I slept in a bed with all of them when Macauley Culkin was little: Kieran Culkin would sleep on this side, Macauley Culkin was on this side, his sisters in there...we all would just jam in the bed, you know. "We would wake up like dawn and go in the hot air balloon, you know, we had the footage. I have all that footage."
Bashir: "But is that right Michael?"
Jackson: "It's very right. It's very loving, that's what the world needs now, more love more heart."
Bashir: "The world needs a man who's 44 who's sleeping in a bed with children?"
Jackson: "No, you're making it - no, no you're making it all wrong ..."
Bashir: "Well, tell me, help me ..."
Jackson: "Because what's wrong with sharing a love? You don't sleep with your kids? Or some other kid who needs love who didn't have a good childhood?"
Bashir: "No, no I don't. I would never dream ..."
Jackson: "That's because you've never been where I've been mentally ..."
Posted on Friday, June 26, 2009 10:03:14 AM ET by ETL:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2279938/posts
A big Duh! for the last line.
:)
“My answer to that question has always been YES.”
You are either really sweet, innocent, naive and trusting or you have a screw loose. All I can say is I’m glad I’m not your 6 year old. Admiring Jackson’s talent and feeling some sympathy for a tortured soul that never grew up does not mean that you should turn a blind eye to the danger signals he was clearly sending regarding his affection for children.
Maybe because the MSM hasn’t spent 24/7 glorifying Barney Frank? Maybe he has opined about Barney Frank but if he did, you wouldn’t hear about it. Barney Frank wouldn’t be covered because he’s not an ‘icon’ of the current popular culture with which the MSM is obsessed.
Oh, sickening. I cannot believe a mother would allow her child to testify to these things if they were not true. Either way, it stinks to high heaven.
I think his type of wealth, and his type of funeral, go along with the cultural style from which he came, where a family on welfare living in a rat-infested slum has a big Cadillac parked out front and extremely flashy clothes.
Responses on threads such as this never fail to boost my opinion that we are doomed. We just didn’t catch and reverse the trend in our nation soon enough. We have folks claiming to be conservatives on a conservative web site spouting the pablum they’ve been indoctrinated with over the past couple decades to defend this piece of human excrement. Like I said-we are doomed.
Agreed. There used to be an old term for that, quite accurate I might add, but I won't repeat it here :)
The backpedaling begins.
Now the family will sue him. You never publically say things like that about someone unless it’s the actual truth....
Since you just did that by saying "the family will sue him" instead of "the family could try to sue", aren't you libeling the family?
My point is, when you're losing an argument, it's better to back down. Others are not hating the man; they are condemning the sin. Even if he never touched a child, he forsook Christ, he fondled himself in public, and he mutilated his God-given beauty. It was a poor example for the millions of culturally disadvantaged fans who are being exploited to look up to him even as we speak.
In the vapid minds of too many "fans", the continued adulation is a tacit permission to do what he did and suffer no consequences.
I believe that today's 24/7 worldwide media are the reason the devil is called "the prince of the power of the air" in Ephesians:
Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience... --Ephesians 2:2
There was no hearsay nor innuendo about him grabbing his crotch in front of millions of viewers and suffering no legal consequences for public lewdness. You saw it with your own eyes as well, didn't you? Did you not see how he perverted the natural face he was given into something grotesque? You read factual reports of his having test-tube babies of a different race with a surrogate, while millions of his own racial group were trying to rise above discrimination because of their color -- did you not witness those photographs over a period of years? These actions are perverse; his money insulated him. But it did not alter the underlying facts. And many of us here resent the non-stop media adulation of this man whose behavior was and is a very bad example for children and youth.
IIRC, Simpson was found not guilty in his criminal trial, but was then retried in civil court by Ron Goldman's parents for "wrongful death", and he lost that lawsuit. The court apparently found that there was cause to consider him culpable for the death of Ron. I do not know if Nicole's parents also joined the lawsuit. But I have seen Ron Goldman's father on TV just recently, when OJ was in trouble again, saying that OJ had never paid the fines levied in that judgement.
Isn't it possible that the mothers who let their kids sleep in his bed were just as star-struck in their view, and let their children pay a huge price? Would you let your child sleep with an unrelated adult male under any circumstances? Wealth and generosity do not rule out a person's bad behavior. In fact, they enable it.
Dead people can’t sue for libel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.