Why Is This Newsworthy?

On June 14th, Oprah Winfrey was told by an employee of Hermes, an upscale Paris boutique, that she couldn't shop in their store as she arrived at the store after hours wanting to buy a gift. Employees refused to reopen for her. The store told her that they were closed for a public relations event and couldn't reopen.

Why do we know this happened? Because it was actually reported in the news. Who freakin' cares???!! Some celebrity couldn't go shopping. Boo Hoo!! Never mind the fact that store was CLOSED!! Just because she's famous, she thinks that the store should reopen for her. Hell, if I went to that store in the middle of the day, I bet they wouldn't let me in, period.

Guess what Oprah's reasoning is for them not reopening the store - Racism! She plans to discuss the incident on her show when it returns in September. And just coincidentally, racism is the subject of a movie that is coming out around the same time. Weird, huh? By the way, I'd like to offer another possible explanation as to why she wasn't allowed to shop at the boutique. The store was closed!

Again, I have to ask. IS THIS NEWSWORTHY? Was there so little activity in the world that this had to be reported? What's next? A press release the next time Oprah goes to a Starbucks to order a Peppermint Mocha, and they commit the unforgivable sin on being out of Peppermint? A press conference to announce her latest bowel movement? Seriously, the level of celebrity worship in this country is so out of whack it's nauseating. What frightens me is that there are people who actually think that this WAS news that they needed to hear. People, Get A Life!!

Who Says Crime Doesn't Pay?

I love our society. Where else in the world can you commit a felony, not be convicted, let alone charged, and profit from it? And the people of this country are excited, EXCITED to hear their stories. I don't know what's worse - the felons, the judicial system, or the public that supports this practice. Of what do I speak? The so-called "Runaway Bride" and "Deep Throat".

The Runaway Bride, Jennifer Wilbanks, has signed a deal with ReganMedia for her life story. In case you had forgotten who this is, let me recap. Four days before she is to be married, she leaves her home in Georgia. On the day of her wedding, she calls her fiancee collect, telling him that she was abducted, but has escaped. In truth, she ran off to Las Vegas to party. In the meantime, the police and FBI had been called in to search for her. She also filed a false police report regarding the "abduction". That is a felony. Her home city of Duluth spent $43,000 trying to find her. She, through her attorney, agreed to reimburse the city for $13,000. Now, she has signed a lucrative deal for the story and will profit handsomely for it. It's the "Get-Rich Quick" plan for the Twenty-First Century. Before, it was pyramid schemes. Today, it's crime. I'm still waiting to see when she gets charged with her crime. Oh wait, charges will only add another million or two to her deal.....

Deep Throat has come out from seclusion. Joy. Mark Felt, 91, decided to come clean about his identity as the man who leaked confidential information to the press so as to bring down Richard Nixon. Since he wanted to be sure to profit from his illegal activities, he has signed a deal with PublicAffairs Books for a combination biography and autobiography. This was announced by his publisher and his agent. Yes. The former FBI agent who committed a Federal offense, has an agent. Felt, who was bitter about being passed on for the top spot at the FBI, decided to break the law by releasing classified information. This is a Federal offense. Oh well. He's a hero! He brought down a Republican President. It is estimated that the deal will be worth well over a million dollars. Profit, baby, via illicit means, is the way to go! By the way, Felt, by definition, was a whistleblower. And he is lauded for it by the media. Why was Linda Tripp, who essentially did the same whistleblowing activity, and legally, I might add, savaged horribly for it by the same media?

Bedtime for Bubbles

Who knew that Michael Jackson could be so prescient, and that 'Beat It' meant something else entirely?

Amazing. I know I should not let it get to me. I know I should not be surprised at the verdict. But that doesn't lessen the shock of seeing an "alleged" pedophile get Not Guilty verdicts on all 10 counts. Frankly, I think Michael Jackson is a pedophile, not an "alleged" one. And since he gave Tyson Chandler $25 million as hush money, I am not going to use the term alleged for the remainder of this article.

I am amazed that the jury didn't convict on any of the charges. Knowing California and celebrity status, I figured that they would not convict him on the Lewd Conduct with minor charges. But to not even get him on the serving of alcohol to minors, or the showing of pornography to minors charges is inexcusable. They had the kid's fingerprints on the cans of Coke that had alcohol in them; the so-called 'Jesus Juice'. 5 different people testified that they had heard the term before it became public knowledge. They also had the kid's fingerprints on the pornographic magazines, with Jackson's fingerprints also on them. The jury looked at the evidence and totally ignored it.

How can anyone ever be convicted of pedophilia, ever again? In this case, we have the defendant, who has admitted to sleeping in a bed with children. "It's the most loving thing you can do, share your bed with a child". After all, that is normal. Why shouldn't a 42 year old man sleep in the same bed with a 12 year old boy? By the way, how could the jury not see the pattern of only 12-14 year old BOYS sleeping over? Why weren't girls ever sleeping over?

Those twelve jurors have just handed Michael Jackson a license to molest children. Think about it. Like most celebrities, he believes that he is better than most people, and above the law. (Unfortunately, a lot of people also think this way about celebrities.) Before, he thought that he could get away with anything, but didn't know for sure. Now, he has absolute PROOF that he won't be convicted of molesting small boys. Smooth job, jury. I feel bad for the children whose lives will be continued to be wrecked by this sicko. Jackson should just go hang out with Roman Polanski who was convicted of statutory rape by committing sodomy with a 13 year old girl. Just before sentencing, he escaped to Europe where he has remained ever since. Last year, he received an Oscar and was given a standing ovation by the Hollywood crowd in attendance. Does that not explain the mentality of California?

How can any self-respecting parent subject their children to Michael Jackson's home? What is going through the minds of these people? These deplorable, greedy, celebrity attention starved parents should have two things happen to them immediately. One, have their children taken away from them and put into protective custody. Two, put on trial and convicted of child endangerment for subjecting their boys to this whack-job. There is none, zero, zilch, nada excuse that I would accept to excuse the parents for their role in this. But that also does not excuse Jackson for what he has done either. The parents are the enablers, and he is the enablee.

I think this was simply a case of being blinded by celebrity status. After all, O.J. and Robert Blake walked. Maybe the only way to convict celebrities in California is to have the crime on videotape. Oh wait, Winona Ryder was on security cameras shoplifting, and got a slap on the wrist with community service. California Justice. Bought and paid for.

Lastly, I heard this question posed by Michael Savage yesterday on his radio program. If Michael Jackson can't be convicted of pedophilia with the amount of evidence that was shown in this case, how can you convict Catholic priests of molesting alter boys with far less evidence?

What Year Is It? Channel 95.5 Doesn't Know.

Every morning around 6:30 AM, Channel 95.5 in Detroit has a radio contest called "Time Warp". How the game is played is they give three events that happened in a given year, and also they play a snippet of a song from the same year. Listeners call in with their guess of what year, and the first correct caller wins a prize. The prize today was tickets to Cedar Point, an amusement park in Sandusky, Ohio.

Every morning for the last 2 weeks, Robin has gotten up early so as to try to win these tickets. Today was no different. One of the clues given was "James Brown's wife cited diplomatic immunity in court for traffic violations, claiming she was the wife of the ambassador of love". This happened on June 2, 1988. Robin called in to the station, and was told that she was wrong. The other two clues for the day, plus the song snippet were from 1986, which they said was the correct answer. She researched it this morning for verification, and did prove that she was correct. Robin then called the station to tell them about the mistake in their game, and the woman who answered the phone rudely said to her "I'll tell Chad about it." Whatever that means. Not even "sorry".

The "Time Warp" game is a fun game to play, particularly if you like trivia. But if a radio station is going to play a game like this, you would think that accuracy would matter. Obviously, Channel 95.5 does not.

NBA Finals 2005

Congratulations to the Detroit Pistons for reaching the NBA Finals against the San Antonio Spurs. It should be a very good series for the title. However, there is a potentially nauseating sidenote to the series. Tony Parker of the Spurs is dating Eva Longoria. She is an actress on ABC's television show 'Desperate Housewives'. ABC is also broadcasting the Finals. How many times will ABC show her in the crowd, and both mention her relationship with Parker, as well as her show? It could get ugly. Even if they just show her in the crowd whenever Parker makes a good play without saying anything would be gratuitous. Granted, she is very hot, but I can see her being shown ad nauseum, and to me this will take away from her hotness.

I Am An Evil Man

I've come to a revelation. Based upon what I've been called by my friends, I am the following:

• An extremist
• A radical right-wing kook
• A fascist
• A closed-minded ideologue

Why is that? Because of my conservative to libertarian beliefs. Because I have convictions, I am a nut. Because I dare to stand up for these convictions, I am dangerous. But I ask myself, and you the reader, is this really the case?

I am an extremist because I believe in the rule of law, and the Constitution as the source of said laws. How radical! I'm a gun-nut because when the Constitution says that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" I think that means that the people of this country have the right to own arms. I'm an extremist because, after reading the Constitution, I can't find the "privacy clause" that is cited to legalize abortion by the Supreme Court. Heck, I'm a radical because I believe that Congress passes laws, and the courts interpret them, not create law from the bench. Speaking of laws, I'm cruel because I think that the people responsible for breaking laws are the people who are breaking laws.

I'm a religious zealot because I believe that our freedom is a God-given right, not the generosity of government alms. I'm a zealot because I believe that the Lord Our Savior is the one to be worshipped, and not the IRS. I'm a fanatic because I believe in the Ten Commandments. And why shouldn't they be considered threatening? The concepts of "Thou Shall Not Kill" and Thou shall Not Steal" are very harmful and scary.

I'm a far-right kook because I believe that marriage, a religious sacrament, is between a man and a woman. After all, isn't the purpose of the joining of one man and one woman the propagation of the human race? Speaking of children, I'm a wacko because I think the best thing for children is to be in a two parent household with a mom and dad. The New York City public schools had kindergarten books titled 'Heather Has Two Mommies' and 'My Daddy's Roommate'. But I'm closed-minded because I think these are inappropriate books for 5-7 year olds.

I'm a racist extremist because I don't believe in affirmative action. I actually believe that all men are equal and you should be judged upon your merits, not your skin color.

I'm mean-spirited because I think that our tax system is unfair to the wealthy. I don't agree with the regressive tax system that we have today. To me, the punishment of achievement that is the result of higher and higher taxes is immoral. After all, who should determine for someone how much is enough? The fact that I whole-heartedly disagree and am appalled by higher tax brackets for higher incomes makes me a hater of the poor. On a side note, I've always wondered how the argument is made that the rich take from the poor. I always thought that the poor had nothing. That's why they're poor. And because I believe in hard work, and keeping what you've earned versus what can be given out to someone via a government handout, I am mean-spirited.

"You're a fascist". This one still baffles me. I wasn't aware that I was advocating an oppressive government over its people. I didn't know that I wanted to take over other nations and start an empire. Maybe it's because I support the Iraq War, even though that was a liberation of 50 million people, and an attempt at establishing democracy in the Middle East, not the start of a United States empire there. Along those lines, I'm an insensitive jerk because I believe that the terrorists who flew jets into American buildings were at fault for the flying of jets into American buildings. I believe that people are responsible for their actions.

Because I believe in the basic goodness of the human spirit and more importantly in the concept of the human mind, I must be an evil person. If if that is what is considered evil, I'll take being evil to what our society considers 'good' any day of the week.