Michael Jackson: Don't Matter If You're Black or White

I swore I wouldn't do this. Swore it up and down.

But I'm doing it anyway. Here goes....

You're living under a rock if you hadn't heard about the recent death of Michael Jackson. At only 50 years old, on June 25, 2009, Jackson reportedly died from a sudden heart attack; although, at present, reports say that the cardiac arrest may be the result of a drug overdose and Jackson's doctors are being investigated.

I'm not going to bombard you with Thriller videos, a time line of Jackson's life, or anything sappy like that.

No, I think I'll discuss something that is so politically incorrect today: the black MJ and the white MJ.

I was a fan of the black Michael Jackson; a man who has long since ceased to exist.

As a teenager, I mimicked the moves from the Thriller video as I sang along at the top of my lungs.

For what it's worth, I'm still inclined to tune into Thriller, Billy Jean, or Beat It.

An awesome Pop Star that, unfortunately, my children will never really know. ("Michael Jackson was black?" asked my 13-year-old.)

After Jackson's burn accident while filming the 1984 Pepsi commercial and he (supposedly) was diagnosed with Vitaligo, an autoimmune disorder that causes white patches to appear on the skin, became lighter and lighter.

I find it a little ironic that by the time his chart topping song Black or White was released in 2001, Jackson had transformed from a black man into what can best be described as a white man (although the extensive plastic surgery to the facial features requires using the term "man" loosely.)

The white Michael Jackson was the one accused of perverse acts with children (although never convicted, so his guilt is up for debate), a known pill junkie, engaged in acts of child endangerment (dangling a newborn baby over a balcony), and frequently referred to as a "freakshow."

While I hope that Michael Jackson, the King of Pop, is now at peace, I can't help but to wonder: maybe it does matter if you're black or white.

Life seemed to be much better for him (and sane) as a black man.

Read more...

Octomom Nadya Suleman Being Sued

According to The Daily News, child advocate and attorney Gloria Allred has filed a petition in an Orange County, California Court against Octomom Nadya Suleman. Allred claims that Suleman has opted to commercially exploit her children and is asking that the children be appointed a Guardian to make sure the children get their due.

Allred, in collaboration with ex-child star Paul Peterson, also contacted the California Division of Labor Standards and Enforcement asking that they investigate whether any child labor laws have been violated by Suleman.

What's my take on this?

GLORIA ALLRED NEEDS TO LEARN TO MIND HER OWN BUSINESS!!

If a parent, or parents, of multiples exploiting their children is such an important issue to Allred, why hasn't she gone after Jon and Kate Gosselin of hit reality show Jon and Kate Plus 8.

Or how about going after the Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar? They've had 18 children and exploit them weekly on TLC with their show 18 and Counting. AND they force their religious views on their children; making them abide by strict rules. Doesn't that alone just scream ACLU?? (*rolling eyes*)

Why is Gloria Allred so hot to trot for Nadya Suleman? Is it because Suleman had the audacity to turn away Allred's offer of "help"; an offer that required Suleman to do things the way Allred wanted them done?

On that, I say GOOD for Suleman. Nobody, and I mean nobody, has the right to tell anyone how they should raise their children (short of a child being physically abused - and spanking properly does not count, whether you agree with it or not).

I've said it before and I'm going to say it again....I don't agree with what Suleman did. I don't think it was responsible to bring 8 babies into this world at once - single or married. I think you've got to have some kind of mental issue to add even one more to a brood of six that you are already raising, for all intents and purposes, alone. (Yes, I remember Grandma.) And, yes, I do think it's wrong to intentionally bring children into this world that you cannot support financially and expect others to pitch in (read: state and federal aid).

But...I will never agree that it is okay for some holier-than-thou individual such as Allred or Peterson to take it upon themselves to dish out punishment for what they perceive as sins of another individual by suing them over something that too many are doing these days.

If Allred is successful in her plight, get ready because she'll really be changing the face of government as it comes to parents - especially single parents - rights to raise their children; at least those in California. And, of course, it'll spread right out of the land of fruits and flakes to the rest of the country. So watch out Jon and Kate fans - those high-spirited ankle biters won't be able to be exploited any more and TLC will have to find a new show.

One of these days Allred gets going to get her due. I hope it comes in the form of the Octupulets beating the highfalutin crap out of her.

Read more...

Federal Trade Commission Looks to Regulate What You Say On Your Blog

Recently the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has decided to once again trample on American's First Amendment Rights. This time it's directed at companies using word-of-mouth advertising via blogs.

"Revised guidelines on endorsements and testimonials by the Federal Trade Commission, now under review and expected to be adopted, would hold companies liable for untruthful statements made by bloggers and users of social networking sites who receive samples of their products.

"The guidelines would also hold bloggers liable for the statements they make about products," says David Gelles in an article he published April 2, 2009, titled Advertisers Brace For Online Viral Marketing Curbs.

So what exactly does this mean for a review blogger?

"If a blogger received a free sample of skin lotion and then incorrectly claimed the product cured eczema, the FTC could sue the company for making false or unsubstantiated statements. The blogger could be sued for making false representations," says Gelles.

Can you image the impact that this revision will have on your average mommy blogger?

It's no secret that Mom blogs are the fastest growing blog type. Why? Because advertisers can't get enough to spread the word about their products. Of course, now that is sure to change.

When (and it is when not if) this revision takes effect, advertisers will undoubtedly drastically reduce the number of Mom blogs used as a means of advertising. Even if they don't wish to do so, I'm sure their liability insurance companies will require them to do so. After all, it's just to risky; a loose cannon, if you will.

And speaking of liability insurance...how many mommy bloggers are really in a position to purchase liability insurance? After all, most of us are simple stay at home moms, living on one income, and blogging as a way to bring in a little something extra to the household.

Quite frankly, I see this as a violation of my First Amendment Rights! Isn't it my right to say as I wish about a product or service I've used?

For example, Krista of Boutique Flair at discussion held on this subject at Mom Bloggers Club (MBC), "While I'm all for cracking down on companies that promise miracles via their product and hoodwink people, I think this has always been an issue, web or not. I remember my very wrinkly great-grandma slathering herself with Oil of Olay in hopes of fighting wrinkles. Did it work? Maybe for some, but not for her."

Without a doubt, there are many who feel strongly that Oil of Olay, just as an example, does fight wrinkles or create smoother, younger looking skin; otherwise, Oil of Olay would be out of business. And isn't it those individuals rights to say so when they've used the products and feel strongly that they've seen such results? Even if they received a free sample in exchange for a written review from the company?

This most likely comes about as people are like to litigate over the most trivial of matters; even more so in a slow economy, as we are experiencing now.

The only way to save the reviewing Mommy blogger, may be to introduce the idea offered by member Maternal Spark during the previously mentioned MBC discussion, "I think bloggers can overcome this by simply using a disclaimer....'this post is my personal opinion and does not represent the opinion of the sponsor company. My experience in using this product may not reflect your experience...blah blah blah.'"

While the majority of bloggers would gladly be willing to include such a caveat in their review, I personally feel it's ridiculous. Blogs are nothing but personal opinions; why is it necessary to state the obvious?

Oh that's right....because there are those out there who believe everything they read.

Maybe instead of regulating blog advertising, we should regulate stupidity.

Read more...