TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Should there be a Jackson memorial resolution?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Should there be a Jackson memorial resolution?

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 



No Michael Jackson resolution in Congress

Quote:
The controversy that has followed Michael Jackson, in life and in death, reached the halls of Congress on Thursday as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) said she saw no point to scheduling a vote on a resolution honoring the pop icon.

Senior lawmakers had feared the resolution would set off an ugly debate that could hurt Congress' image and upset the Jackson family.
Pelosi Nixes Jackson Memorial Resolution

Quote:
At her weekly news conference, Ms. Pelosi dismissed the idea of members voting on a resolution introduced by Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee, Democrat of Texas, that would honor Michael Jackson. ... During the internationally televised memorial service on Tuesday, Ms. Jackson-Lee said she represented the entire Congress and promoted a resolution she had introduced in Congress on June 26, the day after Mr. Jackson’s death. ...

It calls Mr. Jackson a “noted humanitarian,†an “American legend and musical icon.â€
Pelosi: Resolution on Michael Jackson unnecessary

Quote:
Even before Pelosi's comments, some Democrats said privately they did not support the resolution and a divisive debate would hurt House efforts to muster the votes for priorities such as health care and climate change. ... Jackson Lee's resolution, introduced June 26, was in trouble early. It drew only one co-sponsor, Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif., and was not endorsed by other black caucus members.
Ms. Jackson-Lee can hardly be said to have been representing all of Congress, as she stated at the memorial service, since at least one Congressman walked out when a moment of silence was held last month, citing the unnecessary hoopla, and another called Jackson a pervert, child molester and pedophile in a video posted on YouTube.

Do you think MJ's death should be a matter for Congressional attention?
post #2 of 13
As far as I am concerned there is no controversy.

I have been listening to Geraldo Rivera ever since the death of MJ. Geraldo has always known that MJ was innocent of the charges. He has investigated both instances in depth and he swears MJ was framed and blames it on the lawyer Larry Feldman and prosecutor Tom Sneddon, who had tried for years and spent million of the state of Ca money trying to get an indictment against MJ and couldn't.
This is what he said and what I have read other places.

1. In the 1993 case where the Chandler kid made his phony claim. It ended up being proven it was extortion. The father of the Chandler kid was having a telephone conversation with the stepfather of the Chandler kid and it clearly shows it was extortion.

http://kingofpopmichael.info/the-false-abuse/


2. The same lawyer in the Chandler case was the lawyer in the 2003 case, wow what a coincidence. Read the link above.

As far as the Resolution, I don't care. What I would like to see is a resolution saying Michael Jackson was framed and his reputation smeared because of lying, greedy, unethical people and a lawyer who should be horse whipped.

But even with all the evidence out there showing it was all phony, millions of haters will continue to believe MJ was guilty. I find that horrifying and sad and so unfair to a man that did more for children than any of us could even think of.
post #3 of 13
Thread Starter 
Even without the controversy surrounding the child molestation charges, wouldn't his (still alleged) substance abuse preclude the resolution?
post #4 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
As far as I am concerned there is no controversy.

I have been listening to Geraldo Rivera ever since the death of MJ. Geraldo has always known that MJ was innocent of the charges. He has investigated both instances in depth and he swears MJ was framed and blames it on the lawyer Larry Feldman and prosecutor Tom Sneddon, who had tried for years and spent million of the state of Ca money trying to get an indictment against MJ and couldn't.
This is what he said and what I have read other places.

1. In the 1993 case where the Chandler kid made his phony claim. It ended up being proven it was extortion. The father of the Chandler kid was having a telephone conversation with the stepfather of the Chandler kid and it clearly shows it was extortion.

http://kingofpopmichael.info/the-false-abuse/


2. The same lawyer in the Chandler case was the lawyer in the 2003 case, wow what a coincidence. Read the link above.

As far as the Resolution, I don't care. What I would like to see is a resolution saying Michael Jackson was framed and his reputation smeared because of lying, greedy, unethical people and a lawyer who should be horse whipped.

But even with all the evidence out there showing it was all phony, millions of haters will continue to believe MJ was guilty. I find that horrifying and sad and so unfair to a man that did more for children than any of us could even think of.
well said... It is very very sad that his image was tarnished like that... He was a great, caring person, but the image of child molester will always hunt him, unfortunately.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
Even without the controversy surrounding the child molestation charges, wouldn't his (still alleged) substance abuse preclude the resolution?
IMO, he was not a substance abuser when he died - he was in chronic pain, with chronic insomnia, and had doctors prescribe and administer powerful drugs to him - IMO, if someone should be blamed for this, is not Michael, but his doctors, who not only enabled, but provided the prescription drugs that ultimately killed a perfectly healthy, finally happy young human being.
post #5 of 13
I don't think so at all.

Take away the music and what is left? A man that made the Guinness Book of World Records in the year 2000 for supporting more charities than anyone in the world. 39 charities

Take the, "We are the World" song that raised 40+ million dollars to feed starving people in Africa.

Take the sick children with cancer, aids and other illnesses that MJ paid their medical bills.

When on tour he would sneak away and visit sick kid's in hospitals and entertain them.

The above are just a little, tiny bit of what he did to help people.

He loved children so much and to be accused TWICE, the way he was, must have just about killed that man's spirit.

And with all the evidence to the contrary, millions still believe he was guilty, it just blows me away.

I think he should get the resolution for being the humanitarian that he was.
post #6 of 13
I would have much rather them actually debate the so-called Cap & Trade/Energy Bill, and READ the massive bill before pushing it through the House (doesn't this sound familiar?) rather than talking about Michael Jackson. Or maybe talking about the whole Honduras thing where our President is backing the leader who wants to rip up their Constitution and remain in power after his term is up, and he doesn't care what else happens. Possibly give further backing to the Iranian people who are revolting against a tyrannical government. Or maybe discussing the Afghanistan conflict where Obama wants more concerted efforts and military action, but doesn't want to send more troops in to do it.

So many times here in this forum I see people saying "Aren't there more important things to be concerned about?". We have no power to do anything about those important things. Congress does. So, my answer is this:

Aren't there more important things to actually discuss rather than Michael Jackson in the House of Representatives?
post #7 of 13
You are my new, best bud Carolinalima.
post #8 of 13
Healthcare, education, economic problems, NOOOOOOO, now they are supposed to spend time on this ?

Is Rep Sheila Jackson-Lee related to him, or why would any politician who wants to be taken seriously even bring it up? Would they have tried to create a resolution regarding Marilyn Monroe if she had died the way she did in our day and age?

Regardless of what he was or was not I do not think it is a matter for our nationally elected representatives.
post #9 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
You are my new, best bud Carolinalima.

post #10 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2dogmom View Post
Healthcare, education, economic problems, NOOOOOOO, now they are supposed to spend time on this ?

Is Rep Sheila Jackson-Lee related to him, or why would any politician who wants to be taken seriously even bring it up? Would they have tried to create a resolution regarding Marilyn Monroe if she had died the way she did in our day and age?

Regardless of what he was or was not I do not think it is a matter for our nationally elected representatives.
I didn't realize that Marilyn Monroe was a humanitarian and had helped people.
post #11 of 13
But does there need to be a Congressional Resolution to say he was a humanitarian? Doesn't his life already say that? And would a bunch of money-grubbing, irresponsible, overall corrupt group passing a statement saying that he was a good guy really make a difference to the public's view of him, one way or another?
post #12 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I didn't realize that Marilyn Monroe was a humanitarian and had helped people.
She wasn't; she was an iconic entertainer who died tragically young under mysterious circumstances.

I am not aware that there is a precedent for honoring humanitarians by a congressional resolution. As a matter of fact, the only comparable resolution I can find honors six decades of humanitarian work by the UN.
http://maloney.house.gov/index.php?o...d=72&Itemid=61

While I do not wish to take away anything from the good works that Michael Jackson did during his lifetime, I don't think he can be compared to the UN. He was first and foremost and entertainer. This is even how the resolution reads - it starts with his accomplishments as an entertainer.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.RES.600:

I highly doubt that this would even be a topic of dicussion in our congress, in the media, or even on this forum if those same acts of charity had been performed by a high level executive of a major corporation or an entertainer who had not captured the public's interest the way MJ did. My objection is not to his memory being honored, it is that congress is turning into "Entertainment Tonight."
post #13 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
As far as I am concerned there is no controversy.

I have been listening to Geraldo Rivera ever since the death of MJ. Geraldo has always known that MJ was innocent of the charges. He has investigated both instances in depth and he swears MJ was framed and blames it on the lawyer Larry Feldman and prosecutor Tom Sneddon, who had tried for years and spent million of the state of Ca money trying to get an indictment against MJ and couldn't.
This is what he said and what I have read other places.

1. In the 1993 case where the Chandler kid made his phony claim. It ended up being proven it was extortion. The father of the Chandler kid was having a telephone conversation with the stepfather of the Chandler kid and it clearly shows it was extortion.

http://kingofpopmichael.info/the-false-abuse/


2. The same lawyer in the Chandler case was the lawyer in the 2003 case, wow what a coincidence. Read the link above.

As far as the Resolution, I don't care. What I would like to see is a resolution saying Michael Jackson was framed and his reputation smeared because of lying, greedy, unethical people and a lawyer who should be horse whipped.

But even with all the evidence out there showing it was all phony, millions of haters will continue to believe MJ was guilty. I find that horrifying and sad and so unfair to a man that did more for children than any of us could even think of.
Very well said!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Should there be a Jackson memorial resolution?