Hey You Kids! Get Off My Goddamn Lawn T.V.!

lawyergay posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 3:01 pm.

Maybe we can start with this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/04/opinion/04herbert.html

BookishLookish posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 3:24 pm.

Some good points in that piece.

Michael Jackson’s whole career was based on escapism. Which was fine for me in the 1970s, when I was a child and listened to the Jackson 5ive, who were fun and groovy, but by the time Thriller came out, I was a junior in high school and was going to see the Bad Brains open for Black Flag at CB’s. Then when Michael started chopping up his face in earnest, he totally fell off my radar, except for the occasional glance at the Weekly World News online at the supermarket, to see a headline like this: “Lady Alien Says ‘I Am Carrying Michael Jackson’s Baby!’ ”

So I’m not watching any of that schlep-the-body-around nonsense today. He’s been dead to me a long time.

FracturedAcetabulum posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 3:31 pm.

@BL: wow. The stories you could (and do) tell. Bad Brains and Black Flag at CBGBs? Like, whoa.

lawyergay posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 3:35 pm.

Me too, BL. And it worries me a lot that we as a culture allow–no, welcome–the merest sylph of a sex scandal or celebrity death to occupy us for days while very real decisions are made by very serious men (mostly) about the direction of health care policy, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the environment, etc.

I don’t like being a scold any more than the next guy. Is it possible to kick America in its balls/uterus somehow? Just to knock the sack of Cheetos out of its sweaty grasp and wake it up for a couple of seconds?

FracturedAcetabulum posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 3:48 pm.

OK, and WTF, the header/banner advertisement is for SarahPAC. Umm a Pro-Palin PAC on this website? Do they monitor those things? Yikes.

Palin/Dunning 2012.

htotheomo posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 4:01 pm.

Essentially, he wasn’t molesting a child – he was one.

And the parents of the children deserve an indictment. It was a cash grab.

And I am not even one of his supporters.

BC posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 4:04 pm.

I think once the dust clears we’ll get a lot of “re-examinations” of the MJ legacy more in the vein of Bob Herbert’s. People are mourning their childhoods, etc., much more than they are M.J. Also, I think a lot of the eyeballs on this memorial were there more for rubbernecking than grieving.

lawyergay posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 4:10 pm.

BC: I think that’s right on. For a certain cohort, people about 35-45, MJ is a cultural and sentimental touchstone, a reminder of when they were young, everything was ahead of them, and the world was their proverbial oyster. But at some point we’ve got to grow up!

BookishLookish posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 4:12 pm.

@FA: At that Bad Brains show, I was hanging out by the stage and the bass player said to me: “Would you like to be my wife for the night?” Lulz. If only it had been Henry Rollins who had asked that–he was naked but for a pair of cutoff-at-the-knee sweatpants (no unds!) and some Vans sneakers. The girls were droooooling. But fat chance of that happening…

VirusWithShoes posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 4:18 pm.

There were snipers?????

lawyergay posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 4:20 pm.

Virus: No! That was one of the problems!

lawyergay posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 4:26 pm.

H2: It’s that cycle of abuse that is so tragic. But it doesn’t excuse a sexual predator–even if he is Michael Jackson–from visiting that kind of abuse on other children. At most, it makes it more understandable.

LipstickLibrarian posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 5:01 pm.

@BL: Regarding the schlepping around of the body, a friend of mine said, “I mean, the first few days, okay. But seriously, people? It’s been almost two weeks. He’s the king of pop. Not the king of funk. Bury the poor man already.”

BookishLookish posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 5:08 pm.

@LL: Jews put their dead in the ground really, really fast, so this schlepping business is totally surreal to me. And when a body goes on tour? Like Eva Peron’s? *pre-puking noises* Do not get.

sfbirdie posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 5:43 pm.

@BC: Correct, it is much more about mourning the loss of a part of childhood than anything else. He’s very much a tragic character but this whole fanfare is making me sick.

lawyergay posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 6:10 pm.

To all who swung by Grumps Corner this afternoon: I thank you.

The total comments here, as of 6:00 p.m. ET, are roughly 9 percent of the total comments in Virus’ liveblog. That seems about right.

This is poorly-written and too long, but if you don’t want to feel alone, then check out this. The first couple of sentences should suffice:

http://www.theinsanityreport.com/home/index.php/2009/07/07/random-thoughts/putting-the-michael-jackson-coverage-and-attention-into-perspective/

Again, same deal here:

http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2009/07/07/michael-jackson-freak-show-rip/

And now, in a final, Gen-X/Y ironic flourish:

ChillbearLatrigue posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 6:22 pm.

Finally an open post. Now how does a little chat about Supply Side Economics sound to you guys? Fun, right?

lawyergay posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 6:29 pm.

Chillbear: Yes! Let’s talk about how logically–and morally, and quite literally–bankrupt it is! You first.

ChillbearLatrigue posted the following on July 7, 2009 at 6:43 pm.

Lg: You called my bluff in the fact that I am not really all that up for a discussion about SSE. However, since you’ve thrown down the gauntlet, I have to admit that I wouldn’t even begin to be able to argue it on your terms. I don’t see anything immoral about lowering taxes in order to grow the tax revenues.

One of the main reasons that people seem to hold that opinion (in my opinion) is that they see other “immoral” and “illogical” practices working along side SSE. For instance, W lowered the tax rates. However, he managed to raise more tax dollars than in any combined eight years in US history. Where he went wrong was in the spending. He started wars and cut other programs. Supply Side Economics does not tell you how to spend your tax money. It just argues that if you leave more money in the hands of the capitalists, their profits will grow and you will be collecting on a much larger pile of money. Again, the bankruptcy that we are experiencing is from the government living beyond its means. A trend that has recently been accelerated.

Hey, people. Do LG and I know how to party or what? I’m going to end here lest I have orange cats beset upon me.

lawyergay posted the following on July 8, 2009 at 10:14 am.

Chillbear: Ha…I was kind of joking, too. My problem with supply side and other policies that depend on pie-in-the-sky assumptions about economic behavior–if we let the richest Americans keep more of “their” money, then more jobs will magically materialize!–and regressive taxation is the sheer injustice of it all.

The sales tax on a box of tampons represents a much larger percentage of a $40,000/year salary than a $400,000/year salary. And taxing capital gains at a lower rate than labor strikes me as almost criminally wrongheaded. Is it fair that you or I pay 25 or 30 percent of our wages in taxes while some hedge fund manager pays 15 percent because all his income is from stock sales or stock dividends or the yield on his personal bond portfolio?

I’m also going to stop. I’ve got to check on my indoor mushroom garden.