Michael Jackson Dead

This doesn't surprise me at all.

His father's always been an egotistical asshole.

SokMunkie wrote:

This doesn't surprise me at all.

His father's always been an egotistical asshole.

Daymn... see now, I hated Jacko, but his father is a piece of work. I can't help but to agree with one of the last lines of that article:

Quote :

I don’t know what kind of woman sells her children, but I feel better about her parenting skills than the Jacksons'.

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:

Whenever large numbers of people die, I think to myself, "Well, that's natrual selection."

I also think, "Well, the world was overpopulated anyway."

That's why humans invented war - to solve the problems of overpopulation. Why else do you think the countries that can least afford conflicts are the ones most often having them?

Because you touch yourself and night.

Nihilist wrote:

Lysander wrote:

Sisco wrote:

Eugenics ain't cool man...

:law:

Eugenics is awesome!

That's the thing where they make dinosaurs from mosquitoes trapped in amber, right?

Wait I thought it was mass selective genocide of a certain group of people to promote the creation of superior people!

I can't wish death to Perez Hilton now? DOES THAT COUNT AS EUGENICS

Retroactive eugenics is, alas, illegal, and is generally referred to as murder.

Now if you'd offed his mom before he was born, that'd be a whole nother kettle of fish...

Rabid Badger wrote:

Retroactive eugenics is, alas, illegal, and is generally referred to as murder.

Oh, c'mon. This isn't about being pro-life, it's about being pro-birth. Nobody was bitching when we were making jokes about grown - probably mentally ill - people killing themselves, and calling them idiots.

Trust me, murder is a-ok, as long as you can justify it. Jam a knife through his head, and claim gay panic made you do it, Nihilist. It's the perfect plan.

Mafiosa wrote:

Don't you know that wanting one obviously crazy person to not breed is equal to wishing death on everyone.
This is like the baby Faith Hope thread again. NIL YOU BETTER DELETE MY COMMENTS BECAUSE I AM TOO OFFENSIVE FOR WGW MY DICKERY KNOWS NO BOUNDS.

HOW INSENSITIVE COULD YOU BE, MAFI? I mean, it's only an idiot we're talking about here.

SokMunkie wrote:

This doesn't surprise me at all.

His father's always been an egotistical asshole.

I wonder if this was before or after he found out that Michael made no mention of him in the one will they've found, which named his mother as executor of his estate?

They seem to think there may be more than one will, but I'm willing to bet none of them leave a penny to Joe. None of the Jackson kids have ever been particularly closed-mouth about how they felt about their father, but I think Michael likely had reason to hate him more than the rest, since he was the main cash cow for so many years.

That's awful. He could at least PRETEND to be sad.

Maybe one of the kids' aunts or uncles (ie, a member of the Jackson Five) should do it? They would probably not force any child stardom on them, what with the knowledge of how much it can suck.

Likewise they'd also have experience at dealing with media attention since for a while at least those kids are gonna get a lot of it.

I wouldn't trust Joe Jackson with those kids, not just for how he treated his own, but also, they're Mike's kids and I get the nasty feeling he'd also try and take advantage of their dead dad's fame to kick-start their careers.

I heard there was a report that neither Michael or Debbie Rowe were the biological parents of Paris and Prince Michael, but I couldn't get the page to load. Does anybody have any info on this?
The few photos of the kids, they do look very white, but I've seen mixed race kids with light skin and blonde hair before. Michael never was very dark back when he was still black.

karmyn31 wrote:

Michael never was very dark back when he was still black.

ARE YOU KIDDING?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

That's actually not that dark, in my experience. I know some very dark black people.
Still, people have been saying for years they weren't his kids.

Why is it so important whether they're his biological kids or not? IMO, it sends a really bad message about adopted/surrogate children being less important then biological ones. Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but that's the initial reaction I had.

I heard on the news that apparently Michael never even officially adopted them... if that's true, then yikes.

I can't find it on CNN and the Chronicle website likes to be bitchy from time to time.
I do wonder if Blanket's mother will come out of the woodwork now.

Kirby wrote:

Why is it so important whether they're his biological kids or not? IMO, it sends a really bad message about adopted/surrogate children being less important then biological ones. Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but that's the initial reaction I had.

It could have legal ramifications over who should be their long-term guardian.

Kirby wrote:

Why is it so important whether they're his biological kids or not? IMO, it sends a really bad message about adopted/surrogate children being less important then biological ones. Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but that's the initial reaction I had.

It would've been one thing if he had adopted them, but to me it sounds more like he bought them.

I keep thinking that, bio kids or not, Janet should have them. She seems to be the saner member of the clan, all things considered. At least, she knows how to deal with the media and doesn't really need the money.

This is from when they first started out (1971, so he would've been around 11 at the time)

Original Jackson Five
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

None of them were particularly dark-skinned; he actually looks darker in the picture Sokmunkey posted.

Well, Freezer, when you put it that way it makes a bit more sense.

Only half-Jackson related, but I wanted an excuse to share this (take two )