Michael Jackson ***August 29, 1958 – June 25, 2009***

[S2M]

Word coming down the pike is that Jacko was only going to sing about 13 mins per show....the rest was relagated to some heavy choreography.

I can only imagine what those tickets were selling for, and if I were to have indulged(which i would never have), only to find out the dude was only gonna sing for 13 mins....some heads would have rolled.

[Saint John]

You're entitled to your belief. ...but the high-brow comments cast down, which you took part in, damning me and others for not being so quick to forgive this individual....are rather disgraceful, given the fact pattern here. It's clear that we're standing on opposite sides of the fence here. But my view on this person's shameful life in no way is wrong, just because you chose not to accept his actions as a child molester.

While I admit that i can't see how anyone could ignore such a shameful history, given that we're talking about children.....I respect the fact that you chose to ignore it. But don't stand there and call this a morality issue just because I don't see Jackson as a "tortured, sad individual with a boatload of problems beyond his control" and don't feel the need to mourn his death, iconify the individual and piss on the rights/respect of the children he molested.

Respect is a two way street, sister. While I am trying my hardest to allow you your ability to mourn this individual, to protect your feelings about these songs that you feel are more important than these poor children......the fact that I don't see it that way, and feel the martyring and glorifying of Jacko is a huge slap in the face of the children he violated.

My view on this is no less morally valid than yours. Don't presume to act like the morally just character here, because there's more than one way to look at this issue.

Perfect time for me to jump in. This is why I don't understand why Tito got banned. *I* respect, even if I don't agree with, the other side of the argument. I just happen to believe that there was very little credible evidence that compels me to believe that he molested any child/children. However, that said, there is definitely a pattern of sketchy and, at times, mind boggling behavior. That said, it is certainly plausible that any man that would dangle his infant son over a railing might also be capable of fondling the cocks of little boys. I just haven't been presented enough evidence to say that he did. But I see the other side's argument.

So I'm wondering why Tito would get banned for pissing on the memory of a guy that he thinks was a child molester. He's simply on the other side of the argument, and I would also submit that although *I* don't think he likely molested any children, the evidence does seem to indicate that he more than likely was. I would put it 60-40 or 70-30 that he was. There's just not that "smoking gun" for me to judge him. But I can certainly see, and respect, the other side's argument. I'm wondering why we were (myself included) allowed to tar and feather Augeri, Schon, Cain and Azoff for something as trivial as lipping, but Michael Jackson, a man many firmly believe was a child molester, gets a free pass and Tito gets banned. Check all blogs and chat rooms discussing Michael Jackson and you'll see that it's very reflective of exactly what was being discussed here. A lot tougher and nastier in most instances.

[strangegrey]

Word coming down the pike is that Jacko was only going to sing about 13 mins per show....the rest was relagated to some heavy choreography.

I can only imagine what those tickets were selling for, and if I were to have indulged(which i would never have), only to find out the dude was only gonna sing for 13 mins....some heads would have rolled.

That was probably all he could muster, given his condition. I think there was some shenanigans with respect to the physicals he was subjected to by Live Nation (or whomever the promoter was), just to get the tour booked. The guy was reportedly a sack of bones when he died. No muscle, no fat....just completely gaunt and malnourished.


Also, the other night on MSNBC they ran an old documentary with jacko (the guy that was traveling with him when he hung his poor child out of the Berlin balcony)....the guy, at neverland, asked Jacko to show him how he writes his music. He wanted a glimpse into his songwriting process. Jacko, at the time, was sitting at a piano. Jacko tries to talk the guy out of it....but eventually, he acquiesces.

So what does he do? He doesn't open the piano up and start playing. He doesn't grab a guitar. He doesn't turn on a computer and start stringing together loops (for the record, I do not feel this is an appropriate way to create music, but whatever)....

...He turns on the music to billy jean and starts dancing!

odd.....very odd...

[Rhiannon]

With all due respect, Frank... maybe you're also kind of assuming that people who aren't agreeing with you are convinced of his innocence. I've been very clear in this thread about defending my own morality regarding how it disgusts me the way people can talk about someone who lived a sad life and died an equally sad death. Much less anyone who passes. Regarding his legal troubles, well... I don't know that I believe the molestation junk. I'm pretty convinced he gave the kids booze (deplorable) and that his thought pattern and behavior with children was very odd and not normal by any stretch, to say the least. But what I also see is a manchild with dozens of disorders and a personality prone to self-destruction. I don't feel ashamed that I feel sad for his passing... but more so feel sad for his tortured life (self-imposed, but nonetheless). I mean to say, where's the harm in blasting Thriller and remembering "back in the day"? Who does that hurt?

So just because I'm not so eager to send someone to the gallows doesn't make me personally any less entitled to my opinion than you.
And the same goes for everyone else who has commented on the matter. We're allowed our right to choose. Nothing wrong with that at all.

You're entitled to your belief. ...but the high-brow comments cast down, which you took part in, damning me and others for not being so quick to forgive this individual....are rather disgraceful, given the fact pattern here. It's clear that we're standing on opposite sides of the fence here. But my view on this person's shameful life in no way is wrong, just because you chose not to accept his actions as a child molester.

While I admit that i can't see how anyone could ignore such a shameful history, given that we're talking about children.....I respect the fact that you chose to ignore it. But don't stand there and call this a morality issue just because I don't see Jackson as a "tortured, sad individual with a boatload of problems beyond his control" and don't feel the need to mourn his death, iconify the individual and piss on the rights/respect of the children he molested.

Respect is a two way street, sister. While I am trying my hardest to allow you your ability to mourn this individual, to protect your feelings about these songs that you feel are more important than these poor children......the fact that I don't see it that way, and feel the martyring and glorifying of Jacko is a huge slap in the face of the children he violated.

My view on this is no less morally valid than yours. Don't presume to act like the morally just character here, because there's more than one way to look at this issue.

And while I see your point of view and accept that it in fact could be the correct one and I may be completely wrong here, I'm also capable of admitting that. You're speaking as if it is solid indisputable fact that he is guilty. You, too, could be wrong.

So don't point the finger of ignorance my way making it look as if I'm canonizing Jackson and condoning a pedo-predator, as you put it. I'm not.

And I don't know what's so highbrow for speaking what I think. You have your every right to balance this equation of dispute, but I have every right to be shocked that people can be so cruel to a dead man. I don't pity him, its just hard for me to believe he's gone. So if I'm stupid for wanting to see the good in people, especially one I grew up idolizing, then so be it. I'm a shithead. But I can't help what I feel towards it, and I'll be damned if I'm gonna pretend otherwise.

Don't make me out to be so elitist when I'm just doing the same thing you are. And no, we're not on opposite sides. You have a strong conviction that he's a child molestor. I have no conviction the he's either. I only recognize him as being fucked up and tragic. Since I can't be certain either way, I'd be a fool to latch on to one side just for identity's sake.

And if after all this I seem somewhat less of a person to you, so be it. I was a bit bold toward your comments so I in part have it coming.

[Barb]

These pictures were taken the night before he died. He looks pretty okay to me!

[strangegrey]

Perfect time for me to jump in. This is why I don't understand why Tito got banned. *I* respect, even if I don't agree with, the other side of the argument. I just happen to believe that there was very little credible evidence that compels me to believe that he molested any child/children. However, that said, there is definitely a pattern of sketchy and, at times, mind boggling behavior. That said, it is certainly plausible that any man that would dangle his infant son over a railing might also be capable of fondling the cocks of little boys. I just haven't been presented enough evidence to say that he did. But I see the other side's argument.

So I'm wondering why Tito would get banned for pissing on the memory of a guy that he thinks was a child molester. He's simply on the other side of the argument, and I would also submit that although *I* don't think he likely molested any children, the evidence does seem to indicate that he more than likely was. I would put it 60-40 or 70-30 that he was. There's just not that "smoking gun" for me to judge him. But I can certainly see, and respect, the other side's argument. I'm wondering why we were (myself included) allowed to tar and feather Augeri, Schon, Cain and Azoff for something as trivial as lipping, but Michael Jackson, a man many firmly believe was a child molester, gets a free pass and Tito gets banned. Check all blogs and chat rooms discussing Michael Jackson and you'll see that it's very reflective of exactly what was being discussed here. A lot tougher and nastier in most instances.

Thanks Dan, I appreciate what you said...and I also appreciate someone speaking it out in a such a way that I feel I've been failing at here.

While I don't believe I'm pissing on his grave, or however it was worded here....I do feel that the over the top, outpouring of emotion for this individual, the sheer iconifying of him with either ignoring the pedo-issue or trying to discredit it.....

...is a true insult to those that were molested (or if you do not believe he did such a thing, those that might have been molested).



We're not talking about the death of someone like Diana, who by all accounts, didn't really do anything wrong. We're not talking about the death of Ronald Reagan....

we're talking about the death of someone that's got a VERY shady past who should be held accountable for his actions....and I don't mean God doing his job. I mean, us, as members of the same society of him, not doing his victims a disservice by making Jackson out to be an Icon.


I also don't believe the junk about him being a tortured soul or he had a tough life or he can't help it...etc. He wasn't retarded. He was an adult, who was expected to act in accordance with the rules that society has thrust on all of us. If we're to go down the dark path of excusing some individuals who were given pretext for their actions, we wouldn't have a society worth protecting.

Jackson's childhood should NEVER have EVER been used as anything other than a mere explanation of his still shameful actions. NEVER to excuse them.

[Voyager]

There couldn't be a more polarizing figure than Michael Jackson. O.J. Simpson brings more of a racial divide, whereas Michael Jackson represents more of a political or moral controversy.

I never was much of a Michael Jackson fan as a youth simply because I grew up around hair metal fans who were convinced that Rod Stewart and Michael Jackson were both cumguzzling glamour rocking fags. This was the type of influence that kept me from listening to his music, not to mention his freaky antics such as changing his appearance and his skin color.

As far as the whole pedophile thing goes, I think that any parent who allowed Michael Jackson to sleep in the same bed as their son after the 1993 allegations of pedophilia againts him should be put in prison themselves. My take on it is that Michael was more at the emotional maturity level of a playful child as opposed to that of a dangerous sexual predator. I think if he ever did try to penetrate one of those boys, they could easily kick his ass with a punch or two. I seriously doubt that he raped any of the boys... but there may have been some stupid behavior on Jacko's part that involved some Jesus Juice and a little spooning. Again, I go back to the fact that anyone who would allow their child to be put in that position after the 1993 allegations should be in a mental ward at the very least.

I think Jacko had a continual inner torment that drove him to great lengths to try to soothe it. Unfortunately he was unable to tame it to a level that allowed him to be normal. He will find a lot more mercy from people in death than he ever did while alive. I am one of them. I can actually listen to his music now and appreciate it in a way that I couldn't while he was alive and mired in controversy.

[S2M]

Myself, I find it hard to believe that of the many children Jacko had contact with....only TWO have brought forth accusations. And another part of me can't fathom why Jackson didn't want this to go to court. Paying families off. These could have been cases where people saw dollar signs. Given his weird personna, probably thought that it wouldn't have been a stretch to get a conviction....

When celebrities are involved you rarely get the whole story....Hush money rules in tinseltown.

[strangegrey]

And if after all this I seem somewhat less of a person to you, so be it. I was a bit bold toward your comments so I in part have it coming.

Rhi, come on! Of course not...I think no differently of you before or after this thread got heated...and that's to say that my opinion of you is no less than what it always was.

I do think that my stance on this got off on the wrong foot. I've personally apologized to some here and elsewhere...because I do have a VERY STRONG opinion regarding this man's past. If I've come across as overly forceful and strong in this thread, it's because if there's one social issue that I feel stronger about anything.....it's sexual child abuse. There isn't a social cure for it, except death. It's not battered women or rape....it's the taking of a child's innocence, through the most violent act ever conceived. It is without a doubt, the most disgusting thing that a person can ever do to another.

The fact that Michael Jackson's connection with sexual child abuse is not a one time thing, is what makes this a very serious issue.

Also, let's be honest here...The difference between last week and this week, was that last week, he was a recluse/exile who didn't make the news/papers other than the usual BS.

Now that he's dead, A great effort to iconify him has my emotions surging high. REAL high.

[bluejeangirl76]

Myself, I find it hard to believe that of the many children Jacko had contact with....only TWO have brought forth accusations. And another part of me can't fathom why Jackson didn't want this to go to court. Paying families off. These could have been cases where people saw dollar signs. Given his weird personna, probably thought that it wouldn't have been a stretch to get a conviction....

I've thought of that many times also, and as I said earlier - the first one in 1993 I believe was total b.s.

The second time, I have my doubts. Certainly he behaved oddly. No question. But still, I never did trust that kid's mother. Although I admit at the time, I believed he was guilty because the evidence that I heard was just ... but there are enough things about it that, for me, do not add up.

If this was the case, then out of the many children that are said to have been hanging around that asylum, why in all these years have only two made this claim?

Let me tell you, if someone touched MY child, no amount of money in the world would stop me from prosecuting. But that first family took their payoff and ran like hell. I don't believe he ever did anything to that kid. I think the family saw a weird guy and figured people would believe the claim.

[Blueskies]

These pictures were taken the night before he died. He looks pretty okay to me!

Wow! He looks ok to you?? Take a look at some of his videos......sure he was skinny before but my gosh, look at these pics...he looks like a complete skeleton !

[Voyager]

Myself, I find it hard to believe that of the many children Jacko had contact with....only TWO have brought forth accusations. And another part of me can't fathom why Jackson didn't want this to go to court. Paying families off. These could have been cases where people saw dollar signs. Given his weird personna, probably thought that it wouldn't have been a stretch to get a conviction....

When celebrities are involved you rarely get the whole story....Hush money rules in tinseltown.

Especially when the celebrities are extremely vulnerable such as Anna Nicole, Britney Spears, and Michael Jackson. Many of them have borderline personality disorder which turns them into an easy target to exploit. The sad thing is that their own parents started the exploitation cycle, and they usually do nothing to stop it.

[Barb]

And if after all this I seem somewhat less of a person to you, so be it. I was a bit bold toward your comments so I in part have it coming.

Rhi, come on! Of course not...I think no differently of you before or after this thread got heated...and that's to say that my opinion of you is no less than what it always was.

I do think that my stance on this got off on the wrong foot. I've personally apologized to some here and elsewhere...because I do have a VERY STRONG opinion regarding this man's past. If I've come across as overly forceful and strong in this thread, it's because if there's one social issue that I feel stronger about anything.....it's sexual child abuse. There isn't a social cure for it, except death. It's not battered women or rape....it's the taking of a child's innocence, through the most violent act ever conceived. It is without a doubt, the most disgusting thing that a person can ever do to another.

The fact that Michael Jackson's connection with sexual child abuse is not a one time thing, is what makes this a very serious issue.

Also, let's be honest here...The difference between last week and this week, was that last week, he was a recluse/exile who didn't make the news/papers other than the usual BS.

Now that he's dead, A great effort to iconify him has my emotions surging high. REAL high.

I always appreciate your passion, Frank. I guess what I don't understand is how you can be so certain of the actions of a person you've never met. He was acquitted by a Santa Barbara jury. This is no star struck, brain dead LA jury. As I understand it, the witnesses and evidence didn't hold up.

I'm not saying he is or isn't a child molester. I'm honestly saying I just don't know. No one is mourning the loss of the creepy middle aged man he has been for the last 10 or so years. I think we are recognizing that we witnessed a one in a million talent who enterained the hell out of us during our life time. For inexplicable reasons, the impact is heavy.

I watch his videos and his performances and he was just magical and electrifying. For me, I guess it's a realization that that version of MJ died a long, long time ago. The whole thing is just sad.

[Blueskies]

Perfect time for me to jump in. This is why I don't understand why Tito got banned. *I* respect, even if I don't agree with, the other side of the argument. I just happen to believe that there was very little credible evidence that compels me to believe that he molested any child/children. However, that said, there is definitely a pattern of sketchy and, at times, mind boggling behavior. That said, it is certainly plausible that any man that would dangle his infant son over a railing might also be capable of fondling the cocks of little boys. I just haven't been presented enough evidence to say that he did. But I see the other side's argument.

So I'm wondering why Tito would get banned for pissing on the memory of a guy that he thinks was a child molester. He's simply on the other side of the argument, and I would also submit that although *I* don't think he likely molested any children, the evidence does seem to indicate that he more than likely was. I would put it 60-40 or 70-30 that he was. There's just not that "smoking gun" for me to judge him. But I can certainly see, and respect, the other side's argument. I'm wondering why we were (myself included) allowed to tar and feather Augeri, Schon, Cain and Azoff for something as trivial as lipping, but Michael Jackson, a man many firmly believe was a child molester, gets a free pass and Tito gets banned. Check all blogs and chat rooms discussing Michael Jackson and you'll see that it's very reflective of exactly what was being discussed here. A lot tougher and nastier in most instances.

Thanks Dan, I appreciate what you said...and I also appreciate someone speaking it out in a such a way that I feel I've been failing at here.

While I don't believe I'm pissing on his grave, or however it was worded here....I do feel that the over the top, outpouring of emotion for this individual, the sheer iconifying of him with either ignoring the pedo-issue or trying to discredit it.....

...is a true insult to those that were molested (or if you do not believe he did such a thing, those that might have been molested).



We're not talking about the death of someone like Diana, who by all accounts, didn't really do anything wrong. We're not talking about the death of Ronald Reagan....

we're talking about the death of someone that's got a VERY shady past who should be held accountable for his actions....and I don't mean God doing his job. I mean, us, as members of the same society of him, not doing his victims a disservice by making Jackson out to be an Icon.


I also don't believe the junk about him being a tortured soul or he had a tough life or he can't help it...etc. He wasn't retarded. He was an adult, who was expected to act in accordance with the rules that society has thrust on all of us. If we're to go down the dark path of excusing some individuals who were given pretext for their actions, we wouldn't have a society worth protecting.

Jackson's childhood should NEVER have EVER been used as anything other than a mere explanation of his still shameful actions. NEVER to excuse them.

No..I don't think that anyone's childhood ...any abuse they have received ...is an excuse to be an abuser....if I felt he was guilty of being a pedophile then I wouldn't give a darn for whatever he went thru in the past. There is no excuse to abuse a child either sexually, physically or emotionally...even if the abuser was abused.

[Rhiannon]

And if after all this I seem somewhat less of a person to you, so be it. I was a bit bold toward your comments so I in part have it coming.

Rhi, come on! Of course not...I think no differently of you before or after this thread got heated...and that's to say that my opinion of you is no less than what it always was.

I do think that my stance on this got off on the wrong foot. I've personally apologized to some here and elsewhere...because I do have a VERY STRONG opinion regarding this man's past. If I've come across as overly forceful and strong in this thread, it's because if there's one social issue that I feel stronger about anything.....it's sexual child abuse. There isn't a social cure for it, except death. It's not battered women or rape....it's the taking of a child's innocence, through the most violent act ever conceived. It is without a doubt, the most disgusting thing that a person can ever do to another.

The fact that Michael Jackson's connection with sexual child abuse is not a one time thing, is what makes this a very serious issue.

Also, let's be honest here...The difference between last week and this week, was that last week, he was a recluse/exile who didn't make the news/papers other than the usual BS.

Now that he's dead, A great effort to iconify him has my emotions surging high. REAL high.

Better not be, who would smack-talk on my status updates?

Its all good here, I think I got on the defensive feeling lumped in with these people leaving flowers at his childhood home or dancing at the Apollo. It's detestable and silly on the American media's part for being obsessed with this coverage. We have men and women dying overseas and kids starving in our streets, an economy in shambles. But dude's nanny said she pumped his stomach, stay tuned for the one hour special.

I couldn't agree more about sexual assault on kids, maybe I don't believe the hype cause I don't want to. I just don't want to waste time judging people I don't know... kind of why I still like Journey, tunnel vision. Its just the music and memories. And those are childhood memories for me, music was all I had until about age 16.

Anyway, I'm rambling now and forgot my own point. I guess I just had to get my point understood. Cause in order to agree to disagree, we both gotta get where the other is coming from. No worries!

[Rhiannon]

I also second what Barb said... he died in 1993. Maybe 95. Realizing that and realizing that within a week two 50 year old publically known men died suddenly of heart related issues and here I am with a 53 year old father working on cholesterol and blood pressure issues has me way hypersensitive. MJ's death sparked my personal nostalgia factor and made me face my own and my family's own mortality.

And its all just too much.

[Ehwmatt]

I also second what Barb said... he died in 1993. Maybe 95. Realizing that and realizing that within a week two 50 year old publically known men died suddenly of heart related issues and here I am with a 53 year old father working on cholesterol and blood pressure issues has me way hypersensitive. MJ's death sparked my personal nostalgia factor and made me face my own and my family's own mortality.

And its all just too much.

Has your dad gotten a treadmill stress test recently? If not, he ought to. My dad (who was a former college athlete and kept himself in at least pretty good shape) has horrible heart history on his family's side and had to get triple bypass at 50 three years ago... he was lucky enough to have an incident of lightheadedness and tingling in the neck after a lunchtime walk on a hot day.

It wasn't a heart attack and they still don't know what it was, but it got him in there (already knowing his high cholesterol/horrible male family history of course) and the stress test lead to the catherization which showed he was a walking timebomb: A 100% clogged "widowmaker" artery (the artery commonly clogged in otherwise fit men like my dad who had stayed active all their lives.. think of the stories of the fitness nut 40 something dads that drop over dead on their daily jog), and two other arteries 90% and 45% clogged. He wouldn't have lived through the summer if he wouldn't have found out.

So yeah, long story short, that stress test saved his life that summer and for many years to come. Get on your dad to do it every year if he's not already, especially if cholesterol and other issues are already there.

[Jana]

Myself, I find it hard to believe that of the many children Jacko had contact with....only TWO have brought forth accusations. And another part of me can't fathom why Jackson didn't want this to go to court. Paying families off. These could have been cases where people saw dollar signs. Given his weird personna, probably thought that it wouldn't have been a stretch to get a conviction....

I've thought of that many times also, and as I said earlier - the first one in 1993 I believe was total b.s.

The second time, I have my doubts. Certainly he behaved oddly. No question. But still, I never did trust that kid's mother. Although I admit at the time, I believed he was guilty because the evidence that I heard was just ... but there are enough things about it that, for me, do not add up.

If this was the case, then out of the many children that are said to have been hanging around that asylum, why in all these years have only two made this claim?

Let me tell you, if someone touched MY child, no amount of money in the world would stop me from prosecuting. But that first family took their payoff and ran like hell. I don't believe he ever did anything to that kid. I think the family saw a weird guy and figured people would believe the claim.

Actually, there was a third. One after the '93. He paid two million dollars out on his inappropriate behavior. It was an employee's son. There's been rumor of more private payouts, but it's just rumor.

Actually I believe the first one more than I even do the last one. When I read how he would go over and sleep at that boy's house day after day, and came crying to the mom once about not being able to see him, something wasn't right. And what was the mother doing letting him come over there all the time to sleep with the boy until time for schoo.? The father is the one that saw them sleeping together when he came over to the house, and put a stop to it. The boy has not ever spoken to his mom again since all of that. I have a feeling he is angry that the mother, who had custody, allowed this to happen and has anger issues. My feeling. The father was out for the money once it all shook down, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

And for me, if I was his parent back then in '93, it wouldn't be about the money. But if there wasn't penetration, I really wouldn't want my child in this big criminal trial against a powerful superstar. I would rather Michael plead to a lesser offense and not go to trial. But if that wasn't the case, I might feel I was protecting him by settling it civilly. That might sound selfish, but the fear of what a criminal trial would do to him emotionally with big high-profile lawyers for Michael Jackson would scare me.

[Voyager]

Once people got to know Michael Jackson he became a cash cow to them. They exploited him in the same way his father did. Michael was just reliving the exploitation cycle that his dad started. Sure he may have had some deviant behavior, but I think it was his vulnerability to being sued that fueled the lawsuits and accusations. Anyone who had their kids at Jacko's house was hoping to get something out of him, even if it was just a free babysitter for the day.

Joe Jackson should have been the one to stop people from exploiting Michael, but he is the one who molded him to be exploited. He even exploited him again the other day when he promoted his new record label while being interviewed about his son's tragic death. How sick is that?

[Jubilee]

Once people got to know Michael Jackson he became a cash cow to them. They exploited him in the same way his father did. Michael was just reliving the exploitation cycle that his dad started. Sure he may have had some deviant behavior, but I think it was his vulnerability to being sued that fueled the lawsuits and accusations. Anyone who had their kids at Jacko's house was hoping to get something out of him, even if it was just a free babysitter for the day.

Joe Jackson should have been the one to stop people from exploiting Michael, but he is the one who molded him to be exploited. He even exploited him again the other day when he promoted his new record label while being interviewed about his son's tragic death. How sick is that?

Oh, I've got a feeling the exploitation of Michael Jackson has only just begun. I fully expect Papa Jackson to be knee deep at the trough, while simultaneously viciously and jealously guarding against those who would dare exploit his beloved poor dead son...

[Rhiannon]

I also second what Barb said... he died in 1993. Maybe 95. Realizing that and realizing that within a week two 50 year old publically known men died suddenly of heart related issues and here I am with a 53 year old father working on cholesterol and blood pressure issues has me way hypersensitive. MJ's death sparked my personal nostalgia factor and made me face my own and my family's own mortality.

And its all just too much.

Has your dad gotten a treadmill stress test recently? If not, he ought to. My dad (who was a former college athlete and kept himself in at least pretty good shape) has horrible heart history on his family's side and had to get triple bypass at 50 three years ago... he was lucky enough to have an incident of lightheadedness and tingling in the neck after a lunchtime walk on a hot day.

It wasn't a heart attack and they still don't know what it was, but it got him in there (already knowing his high cholesterol/horrible male family history of course) and the stress test lead to the catherization which showed he was a walking timebomb: A 100% clogged "widowmaker" artery (the artery commonly clogged in otherwise fit men like my dad who had stayed active all their lives.. think of the stories of the fitness nut 40 something dads that drop over dead on their daily jog), and two other arteries 90% and 45% clogged. He wouldn't have lived through the summer if he wouldn't have found out.

So yeah, long story short, that stress test saved his life that summer and for many years to come. Get on your dad to do it every year if he's not already, especially if cholesterol and other issues are already there.

I will ask him in the morning, and if not make him get one. My dad is like yours, lifetime althlete, lifts weights daily, very active. But the family history is there (part of why I'm so health conscious now).

I'm glad they caught that on him, and thanks for the heads up, too.

[Behshad]

One of the creators of Thrillet video just said on Larry King that MJ recorded a video two weeks ago , involving the famous cemetary from the Thriller video. When Larry asked when we will see this video ,"soon ,I hope " he answered.

[donnaplease]

Also, let's be honest here...The difference between last week and this week, was that last week, he was a recluse/exile who didn't make the news/papers other than the usual BS.

Now that he's dead, A great effort to iconify him has my emotions surging high. REAL high.

You know this isn't the first time that's happened. I think we all tend to do this to people we have known in our lives. We tend to WANT to remember the good, and bury the bad. I think it's human nature, for the most part. I'm guilty, in both circumstances.

I do think he was a freak, a freak created by many people who abused HIM over the years in one way or another. It's easy for me to conceive that he didn't know unconditional love, because since he was a very little boy, his importance to people was wrapped up in how good of a performer he could be. At the same time, he was denied those things that most of us have taken for granted growing up (the ability to just be a kid and PLAY). I personally feel that as a grown man, he may have had an inappropriate relationship with those kids. However, I'm not sure he was mentally (or maybe emotionally is the better word) capable of understanding that. IDK if I'm a Monday-morning QB or just someone who really never gave it much thought until all this broke out. When I really stop and think about all those relationships with kids, it reminds me of the movie BIG, where Tom Hanks was a little boy inside the body of a grown man. Another thought is that perhaps the desire to have his 3 kids came about as a result of his inability to continue to have 'friendships' with kids after the allegations that were made against him. By having children of his own, he could sleep in the same bed with them, or whatever, and it be considered a normal father-son relationship.

Bottom line... it is a tragedy. Michael's life, while certainly filled with enormous highs, was also likely so full of the lowest lows imaginable. I just thank God that I am a middle-class white woman that is at least semi-normal, with a family that loves me for me, warts and all... No amount of riches could ever exceed my luck in having that. I hope each of you also can know that kind of wealth. That's right... I'm BAD (shu-mon).

[bluejeangirl76]

Oh, I've got a feeling the exploitation of Michael Jackson has only just begun. I fully expect Papa Jackson to be knee deep at the trough, while simultaneously viciously and jealously guarding against those who would dare exploit his beloved poor dead son...

You got that right. That guy is a grade A top choice first class asshole.

[donnaplease]

Oh, I've got a feeling the exploitation of Michael Jackson has only just begun. I fully expect Papa Jackson to be knee deep at the trough, while simultaneously viciously and jealously guarding against those who would dare exploit his beloved poor dead son...

You got that right. That guy is a grade A top choice first class asshole.

You think that now... Wait til he's dead.

[7 Wishes]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090629/us_time/08599190760100

[Barb]

Until the last hour of rehearsals, Jackson maintained a ferocious, perfectionist pace, says Holley, who, after decades working with the singer, says he was still astonished by his vocal and physical prowess. Some in the public questioned whether Jackson, at 50, would still be able to command a stage, and recent reports published Sunday in Britain's Daily Mail said that Jackson had been too feeble to dance, sing or, at times, even speak in the weeks leading up to his death. But, Holley - despite his own early concerns about a lack of rehearsal time leading up to the first London shows in July - says the star's presence and energy during his final week was unequivocal. "He'd take the stage with this group of dancers, all in their 20s, but you couldn't take your eyes off him ... Many of his songs have six or seven parts, and he would often come over if we were missing an important note in our mix, and he would sing through all the parts rapid-fire to show us what he wanted. We would just sit there with our jaws open - it was awesome," Holley says. "He could still do everything ... The only difference now was that he would sometimes talk about how it made him sore."

"This time around, we had the technology to isolate just his microphone and listen to his singing separate from everything else. I had no idea what a genius he was. The way he's able to use his voice as a percussion instrument, lyricist, jazz singer all at the same time. I'm sure as people mine his works in years to come, they're going to discover how much is there," he says

This makes it even sadder, somehow.

[Andrew]

So I'm wondering why Tito would get banned.

Cause he has posted nothing but shit for months... And he got up my nose continually and I'm an asshole.

Seriously though...does Tito really need this forum to enrich his life?

[Jana]

So I'm wondering why Tito would get banned.

Cause he has posted nothing but shit for months... And he got up my nose continually and I'm an asshole.

Seriously though...does Tito really need this forum to enrich his life?

I think he does, Andrew.

[G.I.Jim]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090629/us_time/08599190760100

Thanks for posting that Dan! It's nice to hear some positive news prior to his death for once. Nearly everything I've read says he couldn't talk, walk, or anything else just prior to his death. That article is the exact opposite (If it's true), and paints a much stronger picture of the Michael we all knew and loved. I just hope it's true, and not just someone trying to BS us.

Such a shame, and it's really hard for me to fathom that he's gone. He was an enormous talent, and I don't believe there will EVER be another artist to sell 750 million albums...EVER! RIP Michael.