Not A Very Funny Joke

Remember yesterday when I was the ONLY ONE to mention that Anthony Weiner was still lying when he gave his apologetic press conference where he admitted to sending schlong shots with his phone to some unsuspecting hot chick that followed him on Twitter of all things? And remember how I pointed out that his lie consisted of his saying that he sent a picture of his penis to the chick "as a joke"? Right, because that's so funny. Sending pictures of your wang to people you've never met is absolutely hilarious and totally understandable. Or it isn't. And that's why I was surprised that I was the ONLY ONE to catch that. (Then again, the media sucks, so why does it surprise me?)

But yesterday, the "it was a joke" excuse came up AGAIN in another very implausible situation.

Like at the Casey Anthony trial. You remember her. She's the chick who allegedly (Translation: she totally did) killed her adorable 2-year old daughter because she was too encumbered with all of the duties of parenting and would have rather partied with her friends than look after a child. She would appear (translation: she is) to be a horrible human being. Apparently, "joking" has factored into her defense.

According to CNN, testimony in the case yesterday revealed that someone had searched for things such as ""inhalation," "self-defense," "meningeal artery," "ruptured spleen," "alcohol" and "head injury", as well as ""how to make chloroform," "neck breaking" and "making weapons out of household products". Interesting. (By the way, that meningeal artery? Yeah, that's a big ol' blood vessel in the brain. I had to look that up, but NOT because I'm planning on killing any two-year olds. Oh, and in case you were wondering, apparently you CAN make chloroform at home. Who knew? Then again, who needs to know, other than someone planning on killing their 2-year old daughter so that they can have more free time to party? But I digress.)

It was a prosecution witness that testified that these searches were found on the family computer. So, when then defense attorney goes to question the guy, do you know what "asserts" during questioning? His assertion was "that the links do not tell jurors what was on the websites accessed, and that some could have been jokes or information on self-defense." Of course! They could have been...wait. What?

Jokes? Look, a fancy myself as a bit of a funny person. Sometimes

to much to those who know me. There are lots of things that you can make jokes about, but as for someone who tries to find something humorous in damn near everything, let me just tell you that the meningeal artery isn't great material! What kind of jokes go with a ruptured spleen as the punchline? Or the subject. It really isn't clear. What IS clear is that the defense is really stretching here. It could have been a joke? The standard is reasonable doubt, not unreasonable doubt, you moron.

I

guess that it would be hard to defend someone who was so obviously guilty, but would you have to be so obvious about it? It could have been a joke, right? All of that searching for how to make chloroform and head injuries? Nothing funnier than that! Good Lord, she is so obviously guilty. I hope she gets what is coming to her. And with a defense like that, I can't imagine that she wouldn't. Then again, this blog doesn't ever report on anything that makes sense, so I guess it wouldn't surprise me if she somehow got off. People are morons. I can't change that, but I can make fun of it.

moreless

Words For A Cockroach

When a trial comes to a conclusion and the scumbag is found guilty, I am all for the victim's family getting to say something to said scumbag. I'm not overly fond of the scumbag getting to say something, but that's just because of the scumbag factor. I realize it's about fairness. I don't really think it's necessary, but I guess I get it. But really, if you kill someone, I don't give a fat rat's ass what you have to say.

I'm always amazed at the composure of the victim's families. Always. They always seem to have just poise when speaking to the loser who took away someone that they loved. I don't know that I'd be able to be that calm (and I pray to God that I never have to find out). Thus, I really like it when folks kind of let loose a little bit. Sort of like Chandra Levy's mother did when her daughter's killer was sentenced to 60 years in prison.

In case you may not care to remember, Chandra Levy was the intern who was clearly sleeping with California Congressman Gary Condit. And while that was clear, what wasn't clear was how she turned up dead in a park. Granted, a lot of people thought that it was clear and that Condit had killed her. Turns out, not so much. The really unfortunate part, other than the death itself, is that all of the 'not so much' kind of ruined his career. He always looked like a weasel to me. He might not have killed her, but we don't know that he hasn't killed anyone else, really. Do we? OK, we don't. But irresponsible and rampant speculation is really much more fun than the truth, don't you think?

Where was I? Oh, right! The victim's family. According to AOL News, a one Ingmar Guandique (who the author, a one David Lohr, refers to as a "Salvadoran immigrant", but who is really an "illegal Salvadoran immigrant". See how that's different? Yeah, it's very different. He should not have been in this country. There's a big difference between being a criminal and being an immigrant. Jackwagons. Way to go, AOL News...whatever that means.) was sentenced to 60 years in prison for Chandra Levy's death. And Chandra's mother had something to say to him about it. According to the article, "Before sentencing, Levy's mother, Susan Levy, asked Guandique if he had killed her daughter. When he shook his head, she said: "Mr. Guandique, you are lower than a cockroach. F--- you." Awesome.

I just don't get why there isn't more of that. Whatever the reason, there should be. There absolutely should be. I'm sorry for your loss, Mrs. Levy. Oh, and by the way? Nice job.

moreless

A Trial Won't Help The Crazy

From the fine folks over there at the NY Times, we learn of a one David Tarloff and his trials and tribulations. Mr. Tarloff is schizophrenic. That was evidenced no more clearly than back in 2008 when he killed his psychologist, a one Dr. Kathryn Faughey, by hacking her to death in her office. In what would seem to shock no one, Mr. Tarloff was deemed unfit to stand trial.

The article states that "This was the second time Mr. Tarloff, who has a history of psychosis, was declared unfit for trial since his arrest." Really? History of psychosis? You don't say. Was that figured out before or after all of the hacking that went on? I'm guessing that afterwards it was probably really clear if it hadn't been beforehand. In fact, after all of the slashing "His lawyers had told the court that...he was driven to it by voices that he thought were God telling him to do it." I see. So, what is it that is the problem here?

Well, last year "...doctors determined that Mr. Tarloff was in a good enough mental state to stand trial, and so the case proceeded and opening statements were expected Monday." Is that our standard now? A "good enough" mental state? Not great. Good enough. Look, I'm all for putting people on trial who are completely competent, but when you're dealing with schizophrenia, you might just want to hold off a little bit. Good enough might not actually be good enough, you know?

By the way, the reason that they declared him unfit for his trial this time? He "...refused to leave his holding cell to go to court for jury selection on Friday afternoon." That's it? He doesn't want to go into court and so that makes him unfit? Why is that? The article explains that "Someone is declared unfit when he or she is mentally unable to assist in his or her own defense." Sooo...not going into court is unable to assist in their own defense? Since when? If you're so hell bent on putting this obviously crazy individual on trial, what say you just haul his ass in there anyway and see how it goes, alright? How bad could it be? He's nuts, after all. His contribution will likely be minimal. (It will also likely be entertaining as hell, but I'm told that's not what the justice system is for.)

Look, it's pretty obvious that this guy is fruit loops. He needs a mental institution...for a long, long time. No need to rush things. It's not like he's going anywhere. But I certainly don't see any point in trying to hurry along a trial for a guy who really needs some serious head shrinking. It's just a waste of everyone's time. He did it. We know he did it. Is the trial really all that necessary when that conclusion is completely obvious? I'm not so sure that it is.

moreless

Have YOU Seen Chicago?

I just knew that Lindsay Lohan would be the gift that keeps on giving. I just didn't know that all of the gift giving was going to begin so soon! And this is only going to get better. See, she's not supposed to report to jail until July 20th, so the shenanigans have a full 8 days to really get a-hoppin'. And they're starting...now!


A HUGE thank you to the pop-culture minded folks over at PopEater for their article which allowed me to start my day with a huge smile. A big pile of awesome sauce was what that story consisted of. Allow me to share my joy with you and recap the gist of the article.

As I'm sure you remember with glee, when Lindsay was (theoretically) sentenced to 90 days in jail last week, she burst into tears as if she had learned that she just missed a happy hour. Meanwhile, the rest of the country burst out laughing. It's always nice to see a self-centered, almost washed up celebrity get their long overdue come-uppance. Always a pleasure, indeed.

But here's the thing: According to a one Rob Shuter who provided us with this humorous update over at PopEater, Lindsay isn't worried about jail anymore. Nope. That's not a problem for her. Why not? Oh, because she doesn't think she'll have to go, of course. According to the source (named "a friend of Lohan's"), "Lindsay has no intention of going to jail. The only thing that Lindsay did wrong was hire the wrong attorney and now she has fixed that." Oh, really?

I never would have thought that I would have had anything in common with Lindsay Lohan. But apparently, I do! See, I, too, have no intention of going to jail. We're practically sisters! Then again, the reason that I have no intention of going to jail is because I don't get popped for consecutive DUIs and then not manage to attend only 13 alcohol classes in 3 years and miss court dates because I'm at Cannes snorting coke with my friends du jour. Other than that, we're practically the same.

Please, please, please, no one tell Lindsay that she did a little more wrong than hiring the wrong attorney. Please. I love me a clueless bitch. When she does end up going to jail (and she wil), it will only make the spectacle that much more enjoyable for the rest of us. It will be like the Paris Hilton debacle all over again...only better! And we remember how good THAT was! Oh, it was awesome. The tears! The getting released early only to be taken back with more tears! The cries of "It's not fair!" as if she's a tantrumming four year old! It's all going to happen again, only in a rare form not usually seen more than once or twice a millennium. Set your DVRs!

Rob writes that "... now that her new lawyer is in place (her new lawyer being a one Stuart V. Goldberg of the Chicago Stuart V. Goldbergs), sources tell me Lindsay is confident she won't have to spend a minute in jail." Oh, awesome. I love false confidence! It's the best kind of confidence to have when that bubble gets burst!

But, come on! Lindsay isn't stupid. There's a reason for her confidence. The FOLL (Friend Of Lindsay Lohan) tells Rob, "She is paying her new lawyer a fortune to fix this mess. She doesn't care what it takes. If Lindsay needs to start a Facebook campaign or set up protests or something like that she is totally into it. They are treating Lindsay differently because she is a star, so it's about time she used her star power to help her. She's seen the movie 'Chicago' several times, so it's not like she doesn't know how this sort of thing works!" Um, wait. What now?

I'm just going to sit here for a minute and let that last sentence soak in a little bit. I can wait. I can wait and bask in the anticipatory glory that I will be bathed in when she goes to jail. Good Lord...

Let's take that from the beginning, shall we? She makes it sound like starting a "Facebook campaign" is going to do something. OK, granted, it got Betty White to host Saturday Night Live, but that was because there were over half a million people who joined the dang thing. You're be hard pressed to find half of a person that thinks that she shouldn't go to jail. And as for the protests, dear God, PLEASE do them! Please! I would have blog fodder for a week if that happened. The interviews with protesters? My God, the interviews! I could probably die the next day and feel that my life was full and fulfilled.

And I don't know that her "star power" is shining quite as bright as she thinks it is. Does she not realize that the majority of the country was laughing their ass off as she was crying her tears of disbelief? Yeah, they were. And how ironic is it that she doesn't want to be treated differently because she is a celebrity, but only under these circumstances. Oh, sure, she wants that celebrity status in every other aspect of her life, but not when it comes to the legal system? See, it doesn't quite work that way, LiLo, you twit. All you had to do was attend THIRTEEN classes. In THREE years! Is it because you can't count all the way to thirteen? Was that the problem?

And thank God that she's seen Chicago "several times"! Whew! I was beginning to think that she hadn't seen it at all! Look, I don't even know what that is supposed to mean, really. I've seen lots of movies several times, but rarely has that ever played a part in my real life. Multiple movie screenings are certainly not the reason why I'm not faced with going to jail, that I'm fairly certain of. (OK, Ferris Bueller's Day Off did teach me the proper way to go about hijacking a parade float, but other than that, I don't know that I've gained useful knowledge from my cinematic indulgences.)

I enjoy delusions of grandeur. This is going to be awesome. I did notice that there was only the mention of her thinking that she won't have to go to jail . There didn't seem to be any mention of the other part of her sentence that included her having to spend 90 days in rehab. Are there any movies about that upon which she can rely to get her out of rebab? Leaving Las Vegas? Oooh, no. That was probably a bad example. Anything else? No? Nothing? Awesome.

moreless

W.W.L.L. Do?

Just in case you weren't totally convinced that Lindsay Lohan doesn't think that the rules apply to her, allow me to present you with exhibit number 1,348,729 (give or take a couple of exhibits). She's the kind of person that has her nails done and then decides that it's a good idea to have a little message painted on one of them. Now, I'm not saying that it's a direct message to the judge or to the court or to anyone for that matter, but it does give you some insight as to what kind of a lovely young lady this woman is. Moron. The picture is below. If, after clicking, it doesn't enlarge sufficiently, please do visit Huffington Post and see it for yourself in a larger than life format. It's a treat. And so is Lindsay Lohan. Aim high, sweetie!

moreless

Lindsay Lohan's Reality Check

Oh, what a glorious day yesterday was. For myself and for anyone who loves to indulge in the world that is pop culture. Yesterday was awesome. That's right. Because Lindsay Lohan is going to jail! And this is only going to get better.

For those of you unfortunate enough to have not been able to avoid the Lindsay Lohan saga, here's the scoop: Lindsay likes to party. She also likes to party and drive. In 2007, she partied and drove her way into getting arrested. I think that she ran over a couple of inconveniently placed hedges and fire hydrants if I recall correctly. Here's her mugshot. Lookin' good, Lindsay! Behold!

Stay classy! Yeah, she looks a little wasted there. Let's face it, the chick has problems. Her two biggest problems being: a) thinking that she's better than/different than everyone else, and b) living in a constant state of denial (which also encompasses Item A up there). See, she had been on probation and was supposed to complete something like 13 alcohol awareness classes (an ironic requirement, as she seems to be perfectly aware of what alcohol is) whilst she was on probation. She was also supposed to show up for some court hearings so that her progress could be reported on to the court. This was in 2007. It's been three years. She can't complete 13 classes in three years? Yeah, I think the judge felt that way, too.

At least she showed up for court dressed a little more conservatively than she did at her last court hearing in May (when she claimed that her dog ate her passport (or something like that) and it prevented her from showing up for that hearing on time, but did not prevent her from partying away the days in Cannes). It still didn't change the outcome, but it was nice to not see her hooters falling out all over the place. Maybe if she had nicer hooters it wouldn't be an issue.

She also gave a little sob story speech to the judge that, obviously, did little to sway her. Actually, maybe it did sway the judge...into giving her more time in jail. (The prosecution had only asked for a month and the judge gave her 90 days. That's a pissed off judge right there.) She said, among other things, "I did the best I could...I did everything I was told to do and did the best I could to balance jobs and showing up...It wasn't vacation, it wasn't some sort of a joke...I thought I was being compliant...I'm not taking this as a joke, it's my life and career. I don't want you to think I don't respect you and your terms." Ironic, considering that her life and her career are somewhat of a joke these days.

And seriously? How could she have thought she was being compliant when she was missing her alcohol classes? That's not compliant! And what jobs could she possibly have been balancing? From what I can tell, there aren't a lot of folks out there that are willing to work with her. Oh, and at the last hearing? That one film that she said that she had to be in Texas to shoot? Yeah, that didn't exist. Whoops!

The judge, my new hero, a one very Honorable Marsha Revel, said, among other things, that there were "...a number of instances that would show her (Lindsay) not taking things seriously" and "I couldn't have been more clear (about my orders)...There are no excuses." Nope. There aren't. She also pointed out "...she found Lohan's apology insincere, comparing it to "somebody who cheats and thinks it isn't cheating if she doesn't get caught." That seems accurate. Man, I love that judge!

But in an instance of behavior which I can only hope that there is more of, Lohan's mother, the despicable Dina Lohan (who kind of looks like she was separated at birth from Kate Gosselin), spoke with PopEater and said, "This is so not fair to do this to my child." (Translation: Oh, my God! My gravy train!)

Lindsay doesn't have to report to jail until the 20th. I think I speak for everyone when I say that will be a red letter day for all of us. There should be some great motherly quotes when the 20th finally rolls around. It'll be awesome. In the meantime, if you need some awesomeness, the gossipy folks over there at TMZ have video of her providing the judge with her lame excuses. It's quite the performance. Not award winning and certainly not get-out-of-going-to-jail worthy, but it's amusing.

moreless

Lindsay Lohan: The Gift That Keeps On Giving

I've been waiting for this day for a long time. In some ways, I had hoped that it would never come. But in other ways (a lot of other ways), I couldn't wait for it to arrive. And now that day is finally here! That's right. Lindsay Lohan is in trouble again. Woo-hoo!

Do I really enjoy watching the fall of the once bright and shining star? Yeah, I kinda do. If they weren't such douchebags on their way up, their fall down might not be so enjoyable. But they are and it is and that's why we're at where we are today. And I think it's only going to get better.

Here's the scoop: According to the huffy folks over at The Huffington Post, Lindsay Lohan "...has been on probation since August 2007 after pleading guilty to misdemeanor drug charges and no contest to three driving charges." Now, see, she was supposed to be in court for stuff related to her probation this last Thursday Yeah, but see, she was in Cannes. Allegedly for the Cannes Film Festival. I don't recall reading anywhere about her actually attending any films. Parties? Yes. Films? Not so much.

Now, she fully intended to be back in the States for her court date. Oh, sure! Of course, she did! Absolutely. But....well....someone stole her passport. Yeah. That's it. Someone stole her passport. Uh-huh. So she couldn't come back. Not without a passport. Yeah, that's the ticket. Dog ate my homework. She lost her passport. But don't worry. She managed to find a way to pass the time. Behold!


Huh. Interesting way for someone who is on probation to pass the time. Is that cocaine? Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. It's hard to tell, especially if you're asking Lindsay because she told Radar Online "That's a set up that's so untrue.” Now, she didn't say how it's a set-up or what is untrue, but that's what she said. I'm thinking she would have been better off (and probably more believable) if she had just gone with "Nuh-UH!"

OH, wait! I just read over at Huffington Post that she explains the photo with the "white powder" (and her holding what appear to be short tubes similar to the kind used as substance snorting implements) as "I thought I was taking a picture with a fan." Uh-huh. That's how you pose for your fan pictures? What kind of a fan was this? Ceiling fan?

So, she misses her court date and the prosecutor and the judge are not happy. The judge issues a warrant which is recalled almost immediately because someone posted the $100,000 bond to get the warrant recalled. I didn't know that you could do that. I thought you had to at least show up in person and then get the bond posted. Maybe there are different rules for the has-been and strung out.

And yesterday was court! Woo-hoo! She showed up to court wearing a shirt that was pretty much opened up all the way down to the lower end of her sternum. If she actually had any breasts, they would have been falling out all over the place. The judge ended up ordering her to wear an alcohol monitoring bracelet and also required her to submit to drug and alcohol testing every week. As you can imagine, that did not sit well with Lindsay. Her attorney tried to argue that the alcohol monitoring bracelet would interfere with her plans to shoot a movie (currently titled "Machete" and sounding like quite a winner) in Texas.

Now, I don't know how abstaining from drinking alcohol is going to interfere with a movie shoot in any of our southern states. And fortunately, the judge wasn't aware of any reasons either. When Lindsay's lawyer did protest too much, the judge said "...that she was prepared to spend a half-hour reading Lohan and (her attorney) a list of her reasons for ordering the bracelet, drug tests and an alcohol-education program." Half an hour? That's it?

Look, she's had one of these bracelets on before. That was three years ago back in 2007. She's had plenty of time to continue to wreck the train that is her life. Will she be able to pull it off again this time? She's going to have to go until at least July when her next hearing is. (I think that's when they will be discussing her "losing" her passport.) She's going to be missing at least one of the prime summer drinking months (the prime months being all of them), not to mention all of the prime coke snorting days (those seem to be all of them for her as well). And honestly, I can't tell you which way I want this one to turn out. On the one hand, I'm all for anyone getting their act cleaned up. But on the other hand, this could get pretty entertaining if she keeps going down this road. Let's see if she can make it until July without any problems and then decide, shall we? That seems fair, considering that I'm not sure that she can make it until Thursday without any problems.

moreless

Joe Jackson - Child Abusing Leech

There has to be an island out there for a certain segment of society. I envision it being inhabited by the likes of Jon Gosselin, Michael Lohan, Chris Brown, Jermaine Jackson and other loathsome individuals of the same bent. And by all means, leave room for Joe Jackson.

Joseph Jackson is the despicable human being who is Michael Jackson's father. Before going any further, let's just remember and keep in perspective that Joe Jackson is a child abuser. He beat Michael when he was growing up when he wasn't doing dance steps or singing correctly. He constantly ridiculed him about his nose and his acne. He was a child abuser. Is it any wonder that Jacko ended up being the oddity that he was? Probably not. So just remember: Joe Jackson = child abuser. Clear? Good.

When Jacko died from an unfortunate combination of the equivalent of elephant tranquilizers and an incompetent, unethical and amoral physician, his total net worth was unclear. What was clear, especially to Child Abuser Joe Jackson, was that Jacko had amassed an insane amount of money (which will happen when you have the number one selling album of all time and are the most famous pop star in the world). What was also clear to Child Abuser Joe Jackson was that he was going to go after that money in any way that he could. And he did. And he has.

According to the LA Times, Abuser of His Own Children Joe Jackson "...wants the late singer's estate to help him cover living expenses that exceed $20,000 a month." Yeah, see, he has to petition the court for that money because Jacko left him out of his will. That's right. Left him out. Out. As in, "not in". THAT kind of "out". Funny how that works, huh? Some guy abuses you to the point where you are completely whacked out about your appearance to where you end up having your nose shaved down into two slits and a point and you leave him out of your will. Shocking, I know.

The thing that I find most appalling, aside from all of it, is that Joe Jackson has publicly admitted that he beat Michael and his brothers. Of course he didn't call it "beating" per se and he felt the need to quibble over semantics when, back in 2003, he told the BBC's Louis Theroux "I whipped him with a switch and a belt. I never beat him. You beat someone with a stick." (It's at that point that I wondered if Louis Theroux was tempted to whip out a stick and bash Joe Jackson over the head with it repeatedly and then ask, "Like that?") If that doesn't give you just a hint of an idea as to what an A-hole this guy is, then there's no helping you. Please leave now.

So the guy publicly admits to beating Michael, gets left out of Jacko's will, and then decides that for some reason, he should be entitled to some of Jacko's money. Um, you sir, are a buffoon. Joe Jackson is no more entitled to any of Michael's money than I am! The guy made a will and he left child abusin' Joe Jackson out of it. That should be the end of the story. But, as we've learned from too many instances of things like this cropping up in the news, people are awfully full of themselves these days.

I wondered what Joe Jackson, Child Abuser, was asking for in terms of money. Like how much does this man think that he is entitled to? Hold onto your butts, but according to L.A. Now, this jackass is asking for enough money "...to help cover living expenses that exceed $20,000 a month." I'm sorry. Twenty....twenty thousand?? Dollars?! WTF?

If we turn back to the LA Times we learn that "The filing does not specify the amount Joe Jackson seeks, but a monthly budget included in the court papers lists more than $15,000 in expenses, including $1,500 for rent, $2,500 for eating out and $5,000 for hotels and air travel." It should be noted that this jackass receives $1,700 a month from Social Security. I don't know why that should be noted, but now it is.) $2,500 for eating out?! Are you freaking kidding me? Go on. Explain to me how it is possible and/or necessary for someone to require a daily food budget which averages approximately $83 and change. What say you stick to the Dollar Menu there, Joey, and get on with yourself?

And $5,000 for hotels and air travel? It doesn't sound like he's taking Southwest! What do you want to bet that is one flight at the MOST and the rest is a swanky hotel? Bet me. Because seriously, where in the hell is this man going all of the time? Who in their right mind would want to see him?

Now, mind you, Jacko's mom, Katherine, gets a stipend from Jacko's estate of $23,000, but she was in the will. But see, that $23,000 covers herself AND Jacko's three kids. Child Abuse Joey there wants around $20 just for himself! I don't think so, Joe. I don't think so.

The thing is, when there's the extraordinary amount of money floating about like there is around Jacko's estate, people will spend money on all sorts of crap because it's not their money and there's a seemingly endless supply. That is obviously what Joe Jackson is up to. (That and he's a human leech trying to suck money out of a corpse.) If you look at just the expenses for Jacko's funeral that People Magazine details, you'll see what I'm talking about. They claim that among some of the costs "His casket cost $25,000, his burial garments came to $35,000, while $175,089 was spent on security." How in the hell could his "burial garments" cost $35k? Did the man not own enough of his own clothes that he could be buried in for free? OH, wait. If they buried him in some of his own clothes, then that particular outfit would not have been able to be sold at a later date in order to line the pockets of some greedy family members, right? I'll bet you I'm close!

They also detail out that they spent "$3,682 for framing of a photograph of Jackson next to his casket, $1,975 for wardrobe costs for the family, $11,716 for invitations/programs, $16,000 for flowers, $30,000 for additional cars and security." Almost FOUR grand to frame a photo?! Spare me. And almost TWO grand for wardrobe for the family?! How is that? I've been to a number of funerals in my time, a fair amount for family members, and I was never provided with a wardrobe! And you're telling me no one in the Jackson family had anything to wear to a funeral?! I think they did! (Besides, if we're talking "family" like Joe Jackson, Child Abuser, was part of, then that would be five brothers, three sisters, two parents, and his three children. That's 13 people. $151 each? For what? Sparkly gloves?)

What have we learned here? Nothing we didn't already know. Joe Jackson, Child Abuser, is also a leech. It just occurred to me that he didn't seem to have a favorable review of the "This Is It" movie. I guess that means that he won't be sharing in any of the profits of that either. Shouldn't have beat your boy, Joe. Should not have beat your boy.

moreless