Entertainment | 06/30/2009 6:00 am

No Weeping From Mr. wOw on Michael Jackson

By Mr. wOw

Elvis Presley was an irresponsible drug addict. Marilyn Monroe was an irresponsible drug addict. Judy Garland … Billie Holiday … Janis Joplin … Jimi Hendrix … Jim Morrison … John Belushi. All died of their excesses and their excesses are always cited within the first paragraph of any article written about these brilliant train wrecks.

Mr. wOw mentions this because I see our favorite rabble rousers – the "Rev." Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson – are gearing up to condemn all mentions of Michael Jackson’s fabled bad habits as somehow being criticism exclusive only to Michael. Perhaps even racist in nature. Bull crap.

Jackson was a great big talent and a great big substance abuser and general all-around nutcase. Just like Elvis, Judy, Marilyn, etc.

Jackson’s genius and accomplishments will be remembered forever; and that genius will take precedence over anything else – just as his famous compatriots in unnecessary early death are remembered: talent first, foibles next.

But so too will live those pedophilia charges, his drug-taking, his surgeries, his deliberately bizarre antics. Not to mention Michael’s laughably giant ego (ineptly cloaked by phony humility) and his whispery poor pitiful-me pose. Mr. wOw always had just three words for Michael Jackson: Get. Over. It. Oh, and two more: Get. Therapy. I wonder if his "dear friend" Elizabeth Taylor ever suggested that.

This unique American tragedy made his own extravagant prison and wallowed in infantile excuses. He had absolutely no common sense. None. Michael deserves every single tribute paid to him as an artist. And deserves every slam as an artist who destroyed himself because he "wanted the childhood he never had." Who the hell has the childhood they "want"? Mr. wOw sure didn’t. Did you?

(How about a bit of sympathy for the boys in those child molestation cases?! Oh, they got money for their trauma? Michael was similarly compensated for his unhappy childhood, and you see what money did for him.)

As for Michael’s "shocked, shocked" family – every one of whom became rich and/or famous off his back – whenever one of them speaks, I want to roll my eyes. His father, Joe Jackson … I guess I’ll bow to some sensitivity and not attack a grieving father. Though I sure want to put quotes around grieving. As for the kids, I think they’d be best off with Janet, though I don’t figure her as a perfect model of stability, but likely the best of them.

I know this is very harsh – but don’t let Mr. wOw’s cynicism stop you. Go ahead and weep over Michael. So few did while he lived.

Now … can the front pages get back to health care, North Korea, Iraq and Iran?

144 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Furthermore it was the parents who approached him about the money. He did not go to them and just pay them off. I they was so convinced that he had abuse their child, they would have made a deal about it and would want to see him go to jail, instead they approach him for money in exchange for not going through with the case. They are the guilty ones, not Michael!

By A Amedee on 07/07/2009 5:50 pm

e-mail alert

I’m not saying the parents didn’t prostitiute their son for money. The father got a movie deal out of the relationship (he produced Robin Hood - Men in Tights). If he was convicted I believe the parent should have been convicted as well because they knew what was going on and let it happen so they could profit from it.

By Cecile Tunstead on 07/08/2009 7:07 am

e-mail alert

How do you know he’s not guilty? <!—break—> Hypothetically: <!—break—> Is this legal? I am going to get pregnant by another man (no sex involved). I am married to a different man. I have the baby and I do it a second time. We (my husband and I) pretend that he is the biological father of both. We both sign the papers as biological parents (knowing it’s not true). He pays me to leave, after a divorce, and I leave my kids with him. He never adopts them. <!—break—> Can women have babies and give them to whomever wants a baby, get paid for it and the person(s) who gets the baby, not have to adopt the child? Is this legal? If it’s not, can they just marry, do the same thing, but since they’re married, the husband does not have to adopt the baby/kids? Is this because the marriage made the kids automatically his? Even though there is not a trace of his blood in them? What if he’s a child molester? That’s quite a sneaky, clever way to go hide away and have the kids for yourself, is it not? <!—break—>
Can people buy and sell babies, and there not have to be adoption papers? Or do you just have to be married … sell the baby to your husband, get a divorce … and so, this makes it legal? <!—break—> Or can only celebrities do this, like MJ? And get away with it? <!—break—> I am finding it hard to believe MJ has any say so where these kids are placed after his death, since, to my knowledge, they were not legally his. Debbie should not have the kids, since she sold them and MJ purchased them, and pretended they were his. Yes, the kids lose big time and I think should be compensated big time. But, they need a very stable home away from all these crazy people. How/where? I don’t know. But get them out of the limelight! <!—break—> But, he had them for up to twelve years. Is it too late, we didn’t catch this in time, and so let it be? If so, is/will this be a new law for everybody who does this? <!—break—> This is a mess! I think the kids have suffered enough. Get them out of this fiasco now!! They were used, plain and simple. Don’t let them be used again. <!—break—> Hypothetically.

By Connie L on 07/07/2009 8:58 am

e-mail alert

Your <!—break—> for paragraphs are not working, obviously. I tried four times! Now my comment is a mess!

I am going to try one more time.

By Connie L on 07/07/2009 9:03 am

e-mail alert

How do you know he’s not guilty? Hypothetically: Is this legal? I am going to get pregnant by another man (no sex involved). I am married to a different man. I have the baby and I do it a second time. We (my husband and I) pretend that he is the biological father of both. We both sign the papers as biological parents (knowing it’s not true). He pays me to leave, after a divorce, and I leave my kids with him. He never adopts them. Can women have babies and give them to whomever wants a baby, get paid for it and the person(s) who gets the baby, not have to adopt the child? Is this legal? If it’s not, can they just marry, do the same thing, but since they’re married, the husband does not have to adopt the baby/kids? Is this because the marriage made the kids automatically his? Even though there is not a trace of his blood in them? What if he’s a child molester? That’s quite a sneaky, clever way to go hide away and have the kids for yourself, is it not?
Can people buy and sell babies, and there not have to be adoption papers? Or do you just have to be married … sell the baby to your husband, get a divorce … and so, this makes it legal? Or can only celebrities do this, like MJ? And get away with it? I am finding it hard to believe MJ has any say so where these kids are placed after his death, since, to my knowledge, they were not legally his. Debbie should not have the kids, since she sold them and MJ purchased them, and pretended they were his. Yes, the kids lose big time and I think should be compensated big time. But, they need a very stable home away from all these crazy people. How/where? I don’t know. But get them out of the limelight! But, he had them for up to twelve years. Is it too late, we didn’t catch this in time, and so let it be? If so, is/will this be a new law for everybody who does this? This is a mess! I think the kids have suffered enough. Get them out of this fiasco now!! They were used, plain and simple. Don’t let them be used again. Hypothetically.

By Connie L on 07/07/2009 9:24 am

e-mail alert

How do you know he’s not guilty?

Hypothetically:

Is this legal? I am going to get pregnant by another man (no sex involved). I am married to a different man. I have the baby and I do it a second time. We (my husband and I) pretend that he is the biological father of both. We both sign the papers as biological parents (knowing it’s not true). He pays me to leave, after a divorce, and I leave my kids with him. He never adopts them.

Can women have babies and give them to whomever wants a baby, get paid for it and the person(s) who gets the baby, not have to adopt the child? Is this legal? if it’s not, can they just marry, do the same thing, but since they’re married, the husband does not have to adopt the baby/kids? Is this because the marriage made the kids automatically his? Even though there is not a trace of his blood in them? What if he’s a child molester? That’s quite a sneaky, clever way to go hide away and have the kids for yourself, is it not?

Can people buy and sell babies, and there not have to be adoption papers? Or do you just have to be married … sell the baby to your husband, get a divorce … and so, this makes it legal?

Or can only celebrities do this, like MJ? And get away with it?

I am finding it hard to believe MJ has any say so where these kids are placed after his death, since, to my knowledge, they were not legally his. Debbie should not have the kids, since she sold them and MJ purchased them and pretended they were his. Yes, the kids lose big time and I think should be compensated big time. But, they need a very stable home away from all these crazy people. How/where? I don’t know. But get them out of the limelight!

But, he had them for up to twelve years. Is it too late, we didn’t catch this in time, and so let it be? If so, is/will this be a new law for everybody who does this?

This is a mess! I think the kids have suffered enough. get them out of this fiasco now!! They were used, plain and simple. Don’t let them be used again.

Hypothetically.

By Connie L on 07/07/2009 10:21 am

e-mail alert

Connie,

I’m not sure about the U.S., but in Canada if you are married, the baby is automatically considered the legal child of the mother’s husband - even if biologically it is not.

By Cecile Tunstead on 07/07/2009 10:34 am

e-mail alert

I am sorry for the multiple posts, but I was determined to get my comment right.

I have never had such a problem placing a comment on any other site I’ve been to.

See ya!

By Connie L on 07/07/2009 10:29 am

e-mail alert

Cecile. Wow. Really? So, the biological father would have no legal rights, even if he wanted them?

So, if the husband is infertile, the wife simply can get pregnant by another man and that’s that and it’s their child, (the husband and wife) legally, no adoption necessary?

Thanks!

By Connie L on 07/07/2009 10:51 am

e-mail alert

I don’t think it was his fault he was on drugs. The doctor is the one who should be blamed. They ruled this case as a homicide! He should not be catagorized as an irresponsible drug addict! Not like Elvis, Marlyn Monroe, etc. They weren’t told to take the medicine they were addicted. Michael was told by his doctor to though.

By K T on 11/03/2009 6:47 pm