Shaking head in disbelief, YES! people Do associate homeschoolers with Michael Jackso

[vineyard]

So dc & I have their ortho appointment to get ds braces on which he is NOT thrilled about- can you say 13 going on 14 first born male. The only mitigating factor is his glee at dd having to have the headgear & not him. So after 2.5 hours of waiting room bliss & no breakfast we're off to grab lunch at local Stuffmart. That's what I tell them -we're really there so I can get organizational things to do workboxes (Yeah!), but can't tell them that or it would be a mutiny. So I score big time with the back to school color co-ordinated stuff out for college kids. Don't know if we have more than most as we have a state university close. Anyhoo I'm loving it they have 6 different colors in lots of things, I score clipboards $2, CD/DVD crates $1.50, & three drawer Sterlite things with wheels for $9, not as many drawers as I like, but for the $ and budget we're on now with 2 in braces it works.

 

So we manage to breeze through the checkout I'm feeling good only one more quick stop at Home Depot to order the globe for the penadant light dh just installed, but I broke with level last night. Ugh.

 

So we get stopped by the not at all happy female greeter at the door to check our receipt since we have big things and I'm just so happy at my workbox purchases that she comments on the back to school stuff already & I'm just so giddy at my finds I blurt out we homeschool. Now I normally don't put it out there just because I don't have the patience for the stupid things people say about socialization etc., but remember I'm on an organizational high- she replies "So you homeschool just like MICHAEL JACKSON". I can only imagine the look on my face as I quickly blurt out-"NO not like Michael Jackson!" & I'm sure I looked at her like she had 5 heads. I had enough sense to not clarify my statement even more & walked out dumbfounded.

 

I seriously laughed at the previous thread when people thought the general public would think your run of the mill homeschoolers would be associated with Michael Jackson's interpretation of homeschooling. Apparently I was wrong, so another crazy stero-type of homeschoolers lives on in my po-dunk corner of CT. Just an aside we are as clean cut as they come, can't carry a tune in a bucket, & collectively wouldn't be caught dead trying to do a shuffle which would be this bunchs interpretation of dance.

 

Oh, the cultural enlightenment of your local Walmart.

Edited July 14, 2009 by vineyard

[TKDmom]

:lol:

 

You've gotta love Wal-Mart

[Rebecca VA]

I don't see that she insulted you at all. Apparently MJ took his children's education very seriously and provided a computer-rich learning area for them. People who have met his children have been impressed with them.

[Desert Rat]

Oh, I'm sure MJ did great homeschooling or tutoring. But, I would never want to be associated with anything having to do with MJ, unless it was musical talent. He really got a bit nutty the last 10 years or so. I can see why the OP would have the gut reaction to say, "No, not like Michael Jackson!"

Funny story! I would have probably reacted the same way.

[pqr]

Oh, I'm sure MJ did great homeschooling or tutoring. But, I would never want to be associated with anything having to do with MJ, unless it was musical talent. He really got a bit nutty the last 10 years or so. I can see why the OP would have the gut reaction to say, "No, not like Michael Jackson!"

Funny story! I would have probably reacted the same way.

 

 

The gut reaction of many people I know would not just be "No, not like MJ", but perhaps "No, not like a pedophile." This, not his music, is why people I know do not want HSing associated with Jackson.

[LibraryLover]

I've seen Youtube vids of MJ's kids at his mem service, and looked like fantastic kids to me. The girl was well spoken, they were attentive and well behaved. I hadn't known they were hs'd, although I had wondered. I'd call them pretty good hs ambassadors, in fact.

[BethInNH]

I agree! They seemed to be very polite, likable kids.

I heard Michael Jackson say in an interview once, that he did homeschool them, and that he taught them (himself) African History, and many other subjects. So, while he may have had tutors, he did do some of the teaching himself. I think that's great.

As far as some peoples cries of "but he's a pedophile". Lots of people have been accused, but not convicted lots of things, and I always thought that a person was innocent until proven guilty. He may have been a bit strange, and and easy target for many, but I have always given him the benefit of doubt- despite what how the Media has portrayed him. I am proud to have him,and his children be one of "us".

[EKS]

AH HA! There you go!

[Luanne]

The gut reaction of many people I know would not just be "No, not like MJ", but perhaps "No, not like a pedophile." This, not his music, is why people I know do not want HSing associated with Jackson.

 

 

This is starting to turn from TWTM forum to the "let's bash Michael Jackson forum". I'll be glad when it is forgotten.

[Zebra]

I would have said, "Yes, just like Michael Jackson...I have a bazillion dollars and know how to moonwalk." ;)

 

I like to think he didn't do what he was accused of, I never particularly cared for his music, and no, I don't think he probably homeschooled anything like the vast majority of us. No one on this earth had a life like Michael Jackson-he couldn't walk into the local Walmart for school supplies, and probably didn't even need to financially. It's just like when people say, "Oh like the DUGGARS!" and I think..."Yeah, just like the Duggars, I have 18 kids and a reality TV show :D!!!"

 

I used to honestly think all homeschoolers dressed like pilgrims....:lol: so I guess people are going to think whatever they want think. (Which is why I'm with you and don't tell people I homeschool, unless I've lost my mind buying school supplies!!!!!).

[Christy B]

"So you homeschool just like MICHAEL JACKSON". I can only imagine the look on my face as I quickly blurt out-"NO not like Michael Jackson!" & I'm sure I looked at her like she had 5 heads. I had enough sense to not clarify my statement even more & walked out dumbfounded.

 

I can sympathize; you were caught off guard. I can only imagine my reaction if someone said "So you homeschool just like SARAH PALIN". I'm sure I would quickly blurt out -- "NO not like Sarah Palin!" and I'm sure I would look at them like they had five heads.

 

I'm *not* sure that I would have enough sense to not clarify my statement . . . you showed more restraint than I probably would have managed.

 

It's frustrating because the beauty of homeschooling is that it is so unique and individual; we have to remember that to some folks homeschooling is a new concept, so naturally they're going to associate it with the most recent sound byte. This, too, shall pass.

[Blessedfamily]

because this issue has come up many other times besides the Michael Jackson thing.

 

I pay no attention whatsoever to stereotypes and just couldn't care less if people have an image of a "typical" homeschooler. I'm not like MJ, I'm not like Tom Cruise, I'm not like many people on this board, and I just don't worry about inaccurate comparisons.

 

I might have said "Not like MJ" just like the OP. I would have said the same exact thing if I was compared to any other homeschooler.

[vineyard]

I was dumbfounded at the still ridiculously stero-typical lumping of all homeschoolers with the latest abberant news worthy portrayal of a "homeschooling family". I feel as if anything strange happens & it is possibly alluded to that they homeschool then it's as if we're all collectively freaks or abusive or whatever the homeschool family was in the news for.

 

It would be like thinking all blond haired women were mothers like Britney Spears. I don't follow mainstream celebrity goings on, but from the 20 y.o. somethings at work I guess she was the latest hot thing & has had a string of issues parenting her children.

 

I didn't post as an intention to rake over MJ life, but YES I have a big issue with being lumped in the same light as teacher with MJ which had at the very least serious mental health issues. Let alone the allegations whether true or false, but from is own mouth said he did sleep with children that weren't his own. That is seriously boundary challenged & co-dependent they have parents to do that with, you're not their parent. Boundaries.

 

It just mystifies me that the stero-type of homeschooling is so pervasive & the average person fixated on celebrities that your average homeschool family is painted with the same brush i.e. you homeschool so you're like XYZ who homeschools.

 

I guess I give the general population more credit to think for themselves and to see people as individuals. I forgot the herd media pack mentality is alive & flourishing.

 

Now back to get ready for our next school year & remember YES homeschoolers are STILL considered strange by the public at large, so I shouldn't be surprised.

[Remudamom]

Funny. You could have said, "No, I don't bribe children to sleep with me."

[MOM24WONDERS]

Acquitted doesn't mean innocent - look at OJ.

 

I could care less about MJ - I didn't like his music or anything about him when he was alive and I don't understand all the emotianal hoopla over his death (by the general public I mean, NOT by his family and close friends, of course). All over our little town are these ridiculous poster board signs stuck in people's front yards that say "RIP Michael Jackson"...UMMM as IF anyone here in Podunk actually knew him.

 

Back to the original posters story, though, I personally wouldn't want ANYTHING about me associated with Michael Jackson. He might have been a cute, sweet kid, but something happened to him as a man and he WEIRD.

[Luanne]

I think the media is WAY over the top. I would just like one day to NOT hear about Michael Jackson. I'm not enjoying the hipe nor the bashing.

 

I wonder what will be the medias hoopla in a few months from now. It always seems to be something. :tongue_smilie:

[Pink Fairy]

I'm just wondering what Jon and Kate are up to.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:lol:

[Luanne]

:lol:

[LUV2EDU]

I was dumbfounded at the still ridiculously stero-typical lumping of all homeschoolers with the latest abberant news worthy portrayal of a "homeschooling family". I feel as if anything strange happens & it is possibly alluded to that they homeschool then it's as if we're all collectively freaks or abusive or whatever the homeschool family was in the news for.

 

It would be like thinking all blond haired women were mothers like Britney Spears. I don't follow mainstream celebrity goings on, but from the 20 y.o. somethings at work I guess she was the latest hot thing & has had a string of issues parenting her children.

 

I didn't post as an intention to rake over MJ life, but YES I have a big issue with being lumped in the same light as teacher with MJ which had at the very least serious mental health issues. Let alone the allegations whether true or false, but from is own mouth said he did sleep with children that weren't his own. That is seriously boundary challenged & co-dependent they have parents to do that with, you're not their parent. Boundaries.

 

It just mystifies me that the stero-type of homeschooling is so pervasive & the average person fixated on celebrities that your average homeschool family is painted with the same brush i.e. you homeschool so you're like XYZ who homeschools.

 

I guess I give the general population more credit to think for themselves and to see people as individuals. I forgot the herd media pack mentality is alive & flourishing.

 

Now back to get ready for our next school year & remember YES homeschoolers are STILL considered strange by the public at large, so I shouldn't be surprised.

 

:iagree: Some people will actually try to use MJ as a reason why not to homeschool. "...See I told you that homeschooling produces freaks!"

[Night Elf]

I didn't post as an intention to rake over MJ life, but YES I have a big issue with being lumped in the same light as teacher with MJ which had at the very least serious mental health issues.

 

Homeschooling, while gaining popularity, is still not mainstream enough to not be sensationalized in the media.

 

We do it here on the board too. Remember the posts about how cool it was that Will Smith was a homeschooler? So if it's good, we praise it. When it's bad, we shun it. Isn't that the way of anything really?

 

The Michael Jackson thing will go away, just like the whole Andrea Yates thing did. Though I guess it will stick in the minds of some people, like me.

[ChristusG]

I would have probably looked at her like she was crazy and said "Huh?"

 

I didnt even know that MJ homeschooled. And whether or not he's a pedophile, I'm still not a fan of the dude and would not want to be compared to him for various reasons.

[Donna T.]

Michael Jackson is dead and his children's hearts are broken. So what if some stranger asked you a question in a way that particularly offended you? Your children will, God willing, have many more days of homeschooling. I'm sure she didn't mean literally "like", as in, "the same way as" Michael Jackson. I think I would have said, "Yes, you know homeschooling is a great choice for many families of all varieties. It's really getting to be very popular."

 

I think I would have heard the "homeschooling" part of her comment before freaking out over the "Michael Jackson" part.

[stripe]

Do people think you have your kids dancing all day long at home?!

[WishboneDawn]

The gut reaction of many people I know would not just be "No, not like MJ", but perhaps "No, not like a pedophile." This, not his music, is why people I know do not want HSing associated with Jackson.

 

I have to say I'd be uncomfortable to be associated with those people you know who seem willing to judge a man capable of horrible crimes despite a finding of not guilty. It's easy to think the worst of those who are different or outside the norm - happens to homeschoolers all the time. You'd think that because of that we'd recognize and root out that fault in ourselves when it comes to judging others like MJ.

[pqr]

I have to say I'd be uncomfortable to be associated with those people you know who seem willing to judge a man capable of horrible crimes despite a finding of not guilty. It's easy to think the worst of those who are different or outside the norm - happens to homeschoolers all the time. You'd think that because of that we'd recognize and root out that fault in ourselves when it comes to judging others like MJ.

 

 

Please tell me that you are joking. A large number of people on this board think that he was a pedophile, and these are people who we all associate with.

 

Let us not forget that he paid off a family in an out of court settlement and he admitted to sleeping (not s#x but sleeping) with young boys who were not his own.

 

Need I remind you that OJ was also found not guilty as was Chambliss (the first time) for the 16th Street Baptist Church bombings. I can give you scores of examples of people who while guilty were found not guilty. Does that mean that you would not associate with people who refuse to accept the accuracy of the verdict?

 

So no, there is no fault in judging MJ, but there may be fault in wearing blinders. As homeschoolers we try to teach our children to look beyond the popular trends and to question things.

 

I want my children (when they are older because these issues are too depraved for young children) to look beyond the hysteria and over the top lamentations that gripped the US and actually ask who was the man? As an adult, teaching my children, I certainly expect to do that. Just was I can find the negatives in great gentlemen such as Washington, Churchill, Jefferson and Lee I can also find the negatives in individuals such as MJ.

Edited July 18, 2009 by pqr

[chaik76]

Please tell me that you are joking. A large number of people on this board think that he was a pedophile, and these who we all associate with.

 

Let us not forget that he paid off a family in an out of court settlement and he admitted to sleeping (not s#x but sleeping) with young boys who were not his own.

 

Need I remind you that OJ was also found not guilty as was Chambliss (the first time) for the 16th Street Baptist Church bombings. I can give you scores of examples of people who while guilty were found not guilty, does that mean that you would not associate with people who refuse to accept the accuracy of the verdict?

 

So no, there is no fault in judging MJ, but there may be fault in wearing blinders. As homeschoolers we try to teach our children to look beyond the popular trends and to question things.

 

I want my children (when they are older because these issues are to depraved for young children) to look beyond the hysteria and over the top lamentations that gripped the US and actually ask who was the man? As an adult, teaching my children I certainly expect to do that. Just was I can find the negatives in great gentlemen such as Washington, Churchill, Jefferson and Lee I can also find the negatives in individuals such as MJ.

Well, for me, I personally find it reprehensible to judge someone that you don't know (well, really to judge anyone that you don't know the circumstances of.

 

And no, I'm certainly not joking.

[pqr]

Well, for me, I personally find it reprehensible to judge someone that you don't know (well, really to judge anyone that you don't know the circumstances of.

 

And no, I'm certainly not joking.

 

So when I judge Bundy, Manson, various drug using "entertainers" etc you find this reprehensible? Wow.

 

Given your opinions, how do you judge anybody that you do not know? How do you vote in elections?

 

You judge someone's fitness to be president through a few hours of debate and some 60 second clips (plus hopefully research) but you will not apply the same standards to an entertainer?

Edited July 18, 2009 by pqr

[WishboneDawn]

I want my children (when they are older because these issues are too depraved for young children) to look beyond the hysteria and over the top lamentations that gripped the US and actually ask who was the man? As an adult, teaching my children, I certainly expect to do that. Just was I can find the negatives in great gentlemen such as Washington, Churchill, Jefferson and Lee I can also find the negatives in individuals such as MJ.

 

I'm not suggesting you need to jump in the lamentation bandwagon. I certainly haven't myself. But when it comes to judging a man guilty of a crime, especially such a horrible one, more care should be taken.

 

It really doesn't seem to me that you're looking past popular trends. More that you're picking a position in reaction to a popular trend. You cited just two things to support the idea that MJ was a pedophile as if they were somehow beyond question. But could that in itself be a reflection of the way the media likes to present "facts" as if they are unquestionably clear and one-sided?

 

He had a child in his bed. Is the only possible explanation that he intended to abuse the child? Could it simply been poor judgement? Could he have had an immature and naive view of what that meant?

 

And the payoff...Does the truly equal an admission? When someone's career or business relies on their image in the media is guilt really the only motivation you can imagine for why they would pay someone off in the face of horrid allegations?

 

The only solid piece of evidence in the matter is that a jury of your fellow citizens looked at the evidence involved, which constituted what you cited and more, and declared him not guilty.

 

If the media is truly a concern then it's discretion your kids need and the ability to question what it presents them, not simply accept a view counter to what the media presents. The media is just as happy to condemn a man as praise him, either one sells.

[WishboneDawn]

So when I judge Bundy, Manson, various drug using "entertainers" etc you find this reprehensible? Wow.

 

You cited two convicted criminals. I suppose you'd determine the drug using entertainers either by convictions or admissions of guilt. Either way, that's a very different matter the the MJ case.

[stripe]

There are plenty of people who are known to have committed crimes or moral indiscretions that plenty of people continue to adore for their "creativity," such as Norman Mailer and Roman Polanski, and others who are in a never-neverland (pardon the pun) of suggestion, such as OJ Simpson, who was found liable in a civil court and not guilty in a criminal court.

 

We're having the same conversation again and again. I think if we had a male neighbor who was known to keep unrelated teenagers and older children over night in his bed, profess the benefits of doing so, and had been involved in several incidents where boys had accused him of improper behavior, leading to a search of his house where police investigators found various porn including child porn that had fingerprints of both the children AND the adult neighbor, had one court acquittal and several large financial payoffs to the accusers, then at least some of us would distrust that person and not let our children go to his house. (But then, here's a quote from Dennis Miller: "He gets the kids over, and he gives them vodka and porn. You know, you get rid of the child-molestation thing, and this guy’s the really cool uncle I always wanted.")

Edited July 18, 2009 by stripe

[pqr]

You cited just two things to support the idea that MJ was a pedophile as if they were somehow beyond question. But could that in itself be a reflection of the way the media likes to present "facts" as if they are unquestionably clear and one-sided?

 

The only solid piece of evidence in the matter is that a jury of your fellow citizens looked at the evidence involved, which constituted what you cited and more, and declared him not guilty.

.

 

 

I tried to avoid too much detail on the accusations against MJ, but.....well here you go.

 

"With Los Angeles Police Department detectives weighing his claims, Chandler gave them a roadmap to Jackson's below-the-waist geography, which, he said, includes distinctive "splotches" on his buttocks and one on his p%nis, "which is a light color similar to the color of his face." The boy's information was so precise, he even pinpointed where the splotch fell while Jackson's p%nis was erect, the length of the performer's pubic hair, and that he was circumcised.

It wasn't long after law enforcement's photo session that Jackson agreed to settle Chandler's civil claim for north of $20 million".

 

 

I ask would you have let your children anywhere near Jackson? Would you have let a party of children, including yours, go to Neverland? Would you let a party of children, including yours, have a sleepover at Neverland?

 

If no, why not?

 

 

You also said that you "would be uncomfortable to be associated with those people you know who seem willing to judge a man capable of horrible crimes despite a finding of not guilty." Need I ask again about OJ?

 

In the OJ case the "only solid piece of evidence in the matter is that a jury of your fellow citizens looked at the evidence involved, ...., and declared him not guilty", that does not mean (to many Americans)OJ was actually not guilty.

Edited July 18, 2009 by pqr

[pqr]

You cited two convicted criminals. I suppose you'd determine the drug using entertainers either by convictions or admissions of guilt. Either way, that's a very different matter the the MJ case.

 

 

A little misdirection here, on your part. My reference to Bundy was in response to

Originally Posted by chaik76

Well, for me, I personally find it reprehensible to judge someone that you don't know (well, really to judge anyone that you don't know the circumstances of.

I was asking, as I assume she did not actually know Bundy, whether finding him a vile individual who well deserved his punishment was reprehensible. I judge lots of people that I don't actually know, including politicians. I was indirectly asking her if I was reprehensible.

[DawnM]

I think I would have to say, "Well, I have no idea how MJ homeschooled." because I didn't even know he did, although it makes sense.

 

Dawn

[FlockOfSillies]

Well, to hear the Six Flags employee tell it, I'm Kate, as I roll on through the park with my three bigs and the babies in the double stroller. "Where's 'Jon'?" "Uh, he's at work."

[Karen sn]

I'm just wondering what Jon and Kate are up to.

 

:lol:

 

 

LOL! Good one.

[Karen sn]

I have to say I'd be uncomfortable to be associated with those people you know who seem willing to judge a man capable of horrible crimes despite a finding of not guilty. It's easy to think the worst of those who are different or outside the norm - happens to homeschoolers all the time. You'd think that because of that we'd recognize and root out that fault in ourselves when it comes to judging others like MJ.

 

Just the fact that the parents of said "victims" took money and dropped it speaks volumes to me. If anyone hurt my kid I certainly would NOT take the money and shut up. Leads me to wonder if all they wanted was the money......

[pqr]

Just the fact that the parents of said "victims" took money and dropped it speaks volumes to me. If anyone hurt my kid I certainly would NOT take the money and shut up. Leads me to wonder if all they wanted was the money......

 

 

I agree about NOT taking money, but then again I would NOT have allowed my children within a country mile of someone like MJ. Nevertheless simply because they took money may make them less than perfect parents but does not mitigate or deny the crime that Jackson was accused of. Even if, and I am cetainly not accusing anyone, the parents prostituted their child that would not make Jackson (if the allegations are true) any less of a pedophile.

 

Again I post the following.

 

"With Los Angeles Police Department detectives weighing his claims, Chandler gave them a roadmap to Jackson's below-the-waist geography, which, he said, includes distinctive "splotches" on his buttocks and one on his p%nis, "which is a light color similar to the color of his face." The boy's information was so precise, he even pinpointed where the splotch fell while Jackson's p%nis was erect, the length of the performer's pubic hair, and that he was circumcised.

It wasn't long after law enforcement's photo session that Jackson agreed to settle Chandler's civil claim for north of $20 million".

[OnTheBrink]

Just the fact that the parents of said "victims" took money and dropped it speaks volumes to me. If anyone hurt my kid I certainly would NOT take the money and shut up. Leads me to wonder if all they wanted was the money......

 

I completely agree and said the very same thing two days ago to someone. Hurt my child? You WILL go to prison if I have to spend the rest of my life to get you there. Oh, you want to give me money to make me go away? Think again!

 

Eh, I think the "victims" saw an easy mark and took it.

 

Having said all that, I'd not allow my kids to be unsupervised with a "superstar" primarily because chances are, Superstar's values aren't anywhere close to what mine are. I'm pretty picky who I allow dd to be alone with.

[Blessedfamily]

Just the fact that the parents of said "victims" took money and dropped it speaks volumes to me. If anyone hurt my kid I certainly would NOT take the money and shut up. Leads me to wonder if all they wanted was the money......

 

:iagree:

 

I completely agree and said the very same thing two days ago to someone. Hurt my child? You WILL go to prison if I have to spend the rest of my life to get you there. Oh, you want to give me money to make me go away? Think again!

 

Eh, I think the "victims" saw an easy mark and took it.

 

Having said all that, I'd not allow my kids to be unsupervised with a "superstar" primarily because chances are, Superstar's values aren't anywhere close to what mine are. I'm pretty picky who I allow dd to be alone with.

 

:iagree: It might be hard on a child to tesify, but it will be harder in the end for the child to grow up knowing his/her parents took money and let a pervert go free.

[NavyWifeandMommy]

I am behind in the times. I never knew that Micheal Jackson had three children. I thought he just had one child. So if it was me, I would have responded with that. I could see why he kept them home since he hasn't had the best public eye in that past few years. I never liked his music anyways so I had no interest in his passing. Do feel bad for the kids.

[OnTheBrink]

:iagree:

 

 

 

:iagree: It might be hard on a child to tesify, but it will be harder in the end for the child to grow up knowing his/her parents took money and let a pervert go free.

 

And, in this day and age, there are other ways a child can testify and not even see his abuser. I'm no expert on it, but I know they can testify on camera in another room. Maybe one of the lawyer moms on the board can elaborate how its done.

 

It blows my mind that a parent would take money in exchange for sending a true pedophile to prison.

[Luanne]

And, in this day and age, there are other ways a child can testify and not even see his abuser. I'm no expert on it, but I know they can testify on camera in another room. Maybe one of the lawyer moms on the board can elaborate how its done.

 

It blows my mind that a parent would take money in exchange for sending a true pedophile to prison.

 

 

The just videotaped it. She was not made to go into the same room with the person who abused her.

[chaik76]

A little misdirection here, on your part. My reference to Bundy was in response to

 

Originally Posted by chaik76

Well, for me, I personally find it reprehensible to judge someone that you don't know (well, really to judge anyone that you don't know the circumstances of.

 

I was asking, as I assume she did not actually know Bundy, whether finding him a vile individual who well deserved his punishment was reprehensible. I judge lots of people that I don't actually know, including politicians. I was indirectly asking her if I was reprehensible.

I don't know if you're reprehensible or not, I've never met you. I find some of your opinions reprehensible. I find things that many have done to be reprehensible but it does not negate their intrinsic worth as a human being, or negate their worth as a politician, a writer, an artist, etc.

 

 

Oh...and as to Bundy...as a convicted criminal he deserved punishment. I don't believe in the use of the death penalty, so no, I don't believe he deserved that.

 

 

ETA: And as I think that some drugs should be legal...and I don't think drug use makes a reprehensible person, I really don't care if entertainers use drugs as long as they do not perform criminal acts against others.

Edited July 20, 2009 by chaik76