Michael Jackson, Over-the-top, and Over-the-edge

Michael Jackson, over-the-top, and over-the-edge. What ought one say about the life of Michael Jackson, other than he was obviously driven by his art? Should we simply say that he was a musical phenomenon; that he thrilled millions of people around the world; that he perhaps sold more records, CDs, or DVDs than anyone else, and leave it at that. Or, should we give more emphasis to the problems that seemed to have dogged Michael's personal and profession life. I think none of these fully defined the Michael Jackson that I observed on the television.

The Michael Jackson that I saw and admired was all about freedom. That's right "freedom" the freedom to be all that he could be. His initial expression of freedom was when he elected to perform as a solo, rather than with the family. He also clashed with many in the the black American community when he took steps to limit, or obscure his racial identity; he clashed with societal conventions when he refused to comply with social mores and finally; we've all read of his apparent clashes with the legal system and finally this apparent ultimate clash with medical protocol.

Was he the NASCAR driver who risked everything for a victory, or a Van Gogh who simply lived too close to the edge. No matter, we shall all miss Michael Jackson, the "King of Pop"

LesW

An Election, or a Revolution?

Was the 2008 U.S. election truly and election, or was it more specifically a cultural

revolution? I think it was a cultural revolution comparable to the one occurring in Iran today.

Ponder this; in a post 9/11 era what are the likelihood that the American mind was ready to elect a president name Barak Hussein Obama; and not just the name, but the questions surrounding

his Islamic orientation( a Muslim father; growing up Indonesia, a Muslim-oriented country), and, even questions concerning the truth of his American citizenship. If you still believe our was simply an election, in the traditional American way, then I've got a bridge located along the east coast that I would like to sell you.

What I believed actually occurred in November of 2008 was forensic evidence of a fault line that has developed, right here in this the greatest country on God's earth. It's not geological, as say the San Andreas fault line that threatens California, but yet a fault line nevertheless, and one that carries essentially a similar risk, not just for California, but for the whole nation. One side of the fault line is occupied by the traditional role the white American male has played in this country. The opposite side of the fault line is occupied by the emerging role of the white American female [a role I loosely refer to as being the second advent of the woman-the role of Eve being the first]. Along with the white American female is assembled an assorted coalition of others; some young white American males who think they too have reasons to be disenchanted. And, of course the various ethnic and racial minorities who see in Obama their ensign, their Moses, if you would, who would lead them out of their perceived socioeconomic dis-enfranchisement.

If my characterization is indeed correct, it would behoove the Republicans to rethink their strategy for the next election. They will need to fine-tuned their talking points. I suggest that the party revisit its 1994 strategty as spelled out in the Contract With America. In it specificy reasons were put forth as to why the Republican Party's plan for America was superior to that of the opposition. The usual and customary rhetoric is not sufficiently productive and should be abandoned. The party should state and defend it's traditional values, plans and strategies for improving the lives of Americans. It should say so in a language and manner with the least ambigiuity.
When we put our defense of moral issues, we should defend those moral issues on the basis, not so much that they are religious values, but present then on the basis of their value they offer Americans in the present, and in the generational future. If these arguments can't be made, then the party should leave such discussions to churches to put forth and defend.

Les W

It was comforting to see the administration finally take an affirmative stand against the abuses of the Iranian government, thanks in large part to constant prompting by the more enlightened. However, to hear the positive expressions and notes of satisfactory glee offered by those same enlightened ones, one would think that the president had undergone some manner, degree of nationalistic conversion. I didn't see that. All I saw was the child finally saying the word "da da" after being prompted with constant and repetitive urging. Then, seeing the proud father jumping up and down with notes of positive expressions and satisfactory glee for hearing his son repeat the magic word.

Les W

It was good to see former President Bush speak out in defense of his presidency. History will accord his policy of encouraging the spread of democracy as the stimulus for moving the politics of Islamic countries into the 21st century(as indeed, we see already happening in Islamic Iran).
Les W