Hide Your Chickens

A quick note:

I just read over at the LA Times that "Black Sabbath took to the stage Friday at the Whisky A Go Go to announce another reunion tour in 2012". Wow. Well, OK. But if you're expecting me to start bashing Black Sabbath for going on tour when they're all senior citizens (and when Ozzy seems barely coherent on his good days), you'd be wrong. Tour! Tour all you want. I wouldn't mind seeing me some old and withered Black Sabbath. You know why? Because it's Black Sabbath, for cryin' out loud! They tour, you GO! That's how it works with these awesome ancient bands whose members aren't dead (by multiple miracles) from either drug overdoses or multiple organ failures.

But here's the part that annoyed me: "The British heavy metal originators have begun working on an album of new material, their first since 1978." Uh huh. And..."Iommi said the set list will be much more than the usual hour of hits the band has performed since its first reunion in 1997." Yeah...um...no.

See, I don't think that I'm alone when I say that when these old guys go on tour, we want to hear the stuff that made us like them. We don't care about your new stuff. We want to hear everything you did before 1980. We're OK with hearing the individual band members hits (ie, if you leave out Crazy Train, I'm going to be pissed), but we don't care about your new stuff. We're here to hear the old stuff. I don't care about some ballad that one of them wrote after the birth of their child on a stormy night in 2002.

There are a few bands who are the exception to this rule. Not many, but a few. And Black Sabbath isn't one of them. If a band that old wants to play new stuff for folks, they need to have a "New Stuff Only" tour. I have no problem with that. But if I'm going to see a band whose greatest album came out in 1971, don't play me your new stuff because I'm not there to listen to that.

Sphere: Related Content

Houston, We Still Have A Problem

Crack is whack, kids. Here's Whitney Houston giving the concert circuit in Europe a go. Let's just say that it didn't go all that well. I guess that fifteen years of huffing on a crack pipe with Bobby Brown wears on your voice. Huh. Who knew?

Sphere: Related Content

Flaw and Order

Recently, here in the fine, fine state of California, some asshat Senator (said asshat being California Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez) introduced a bill that would, according to a story at Fox News (and they're fair and balanced, don't you know?), "...establish a registry of names -- similar to widely used sex offender databases -- to track and make public the identities of people convicted of felony animal abuse." Now, really, how I feel about that isn't exactly what this post is about, but I'm going to tell you what I think anyway.

And what I think is that if they're going to do this, someone is going to have to tell me where it's going to end. What I mean is that I think that sex offender databases are a good thing. I like to know where the perverts are. (Have you blue-dotted your neighborhood today?) But I'm thinking I'd also like to know where all of the folks convicted of assault are at. Add to that the folks convicted of theft, vandalism, burglary, or armed anything. All I'm saying is that it's going to have to stop somewhere and I think it needs to be contained to sex offenders. Otherwise, I think we run the risk of becoming a little too Big Brother-ish for my comfort level.

But I digress. The point here is that the folks in California (at least one of them, anyway) think that animal abuse is such a horrific crime (and it is) that those who perpetrate it and are convicted of it should be entered into some sort of statewide database. That view seems to be radically different from at least one judge in West Virginia. The judge in mention would be a one Kanawha Circuit Judge James Stucky. Let's learn more about him, shall we?

Judge Stucky presided over the sentencing of a one 18-year old (and old enough to know better) Charles Wiant. Mr. Wiant was being sentenced after pleading guilty for killing his neighbor's German shepherd with a bow and arrow. Clearly, Mr. Wiant is an asshat. That much seems cut and dried. What's not so clear is what is wrong with Judge Stucky.

Judge Stucky sentenced Mr. Wiant to spend four weekends in jail and "...serve 50 volunteer hours at the Kanawha-Charleston Animal Shelter, pay $1,000 to the dog's owners and spend a year on unsupervised probation." Hmmm. Now, the article in the Charleston Daily Mail says that the Judge " ...imposed a sentence that was suggested by the victims and recommended by prosecutors in exchange for a guilty plea." Now, while I don't know what the sentencing parameters for something like shooting a German shepherd with a bow and arrow, I know that it doesn't seem unreasonable at all. I don't know that it seems like one would need to make any concessions to such a sentence. I, however, am not Judge Stucky. And Judge Stucky "...agreed to a sentencing arrangement that will allow him to attend the Hank Williams Jr. concert at the Charleston Civic Center on April 2. Wiant's lawyer, Bill Forbes, explained that Wiant's girlfriend already has spent a lot of money on the tickets." Wait. What?

Correct. This convicted and, apparently, admitted (he pled guilty) dog murderer whose weapon of choice was a bow and arrow, will be allowed to go to a Hank Williams Jr. concert because his girlfriend already spent a lot of money on the tickets. Are you freaking kidding me?!

I think that crimes against animals are in some ways more reprehensible than crimes against humans. Regardless though, it's hard for me to be really objective on this one when I'm an animal lover. I definitely do not think that four weekends in jail is any sort of a just sentence. But it is what it is. And it's a sentence. And I don't think that it needs to be altered. And animal lover or not, I certainly don't give a fat rat's ass how much money the convicted's girlfriend spent on concert tickets. Too bad. Maybe she should have chosen a better boyfriend. Perhaps one who wouldn't get his ass thrown in jail for shooting a German shepherd with a bow and arrow and killing it? THAT might be the kind of boyfriend to have. You know, one who doesn't do stuff like that!

Just remember, kids! If you're going to be sentenced to jail in Judge Stucky's courtroom and think that you may be needing a break from the doldrums of prison life once you're in there, make sure that you purchase some pricey concert tickets ahead of time so that the Judge will let you attend! Make it a country music concert just to be on the safe side. Plan ahead!

Sphere: Related Content

Crack is Whack

Don't do drugs, kids. Drugs are bad. Drugs will take their toll upon you faster than you realize. Now, for Whitney Houston, I'm not sure how "fast" drugs took their toll, but the drugs definitely took her voice and they took her gift. Below is a video of her singing recently in Brisbane (that's in Australia). She's supposed to be singing "I Will Always Love You". And technically, she is singing that song. But it's not the Whitney Houston of yore that's singing it. It's the new Whitney. The one that spent years sucking on a crack pipe or a meth pipe or whatever pipe it was that ruined her pipes. It's just a sad, sad testimony of how something so beautiful and so wonderful can just be thrown away like she did with it. When she was good, there was nothing like her. And now that she's not so good, I highly doubt that there ever will be anything like her in the near future, if ever. It's very sad. It's also a horrible attempt at an awesome song. Ugh.

Sphere: Related Content

The List of Non Performing Performers

Just in case you've been waiting with baited breath for the announcement of who will be headlining or even just performing at the latest Michael Jackson tribute concert, you can breathe once again. The day of the announcement is finally here! Well, most of the announcement is finally here. Sort of. A little. Hey, he got up there and shouted out names, what more do you want?!

The oft procreating Jermaine Jackson had announced that he was organizing a tribute concert for his newly deceased brother (a la ingesting enough tranquilizers to sedate an elephant), Michael Jackson. He decided to hold the concert in Vienna (yes, that Vienna! The one that is NOT in the US.) at the Schoenbrunn Palace because, according to Jermaine, "Michael loved castles." Now, I don't necessarily know if when most people hear the name "Michael Jackson" that they automatically think of his love of castles. Unless "castles" is some sort of euphemism, in which case, Oh! Castles! I gotcha!

My theory on having Vienna for the location of the concert is that it will be more difficult to track down and trace all of the money pocketed from the fraud that Jermaine is about to perpetuate. Now I'm not saying there isn't going to be a concert. Granted, I have my doubts, but that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that when one of the "important charities and worthy causes" that will directly benefit from this concert just happens to be "Jermaine’s own EARTH CARE FOUNDATION whose goal is to ease, as well as hopefully eliminate, the suffering of children around the world." The problem with that is the mere existence of the Earth Care Foundation is questionable at best. There doesn't seem to be any documentation of its existence other than in Jermaine's head. But apparently if you stick the name "Michael Jackson" on any product or service, people just go completely ape dung over it and rush to get in line for whatever it is. That's why Jermaine has been getting away with promoting this concert under a premise that I don't believe I can recall having been used before.

I'm calling the premise the "Wait and See Method". Also known as "Stalling". Commonly referred to by the person utilizing the method as "I hope I can pull this off and not get killed by the angry mob." When this concert was announced back in June (I don't even think that Jacko was cold yet before Jermaine was off to foreign lands, touring prospective castle venues), there wasn't even a lineup to announce along with the announcement. Then in August, a few details were leaked out. I use the term "details" extremely loosely, as it was still all a "maybe they will, maybe they won't" format when trying to nail down who would be performing at this thing other than Jermaine!

According to Entertainment Daily, Georg Kindel of World Awards Media GmbH was quoted in August as saying that "...Jermaine is assembling the lineup of about 10 “of the biggest artists of our time.” Uh-huh. When "Austrian media reported that Madonna, U2, Lionel Richie and Whitney Houston might be among the artists performing" and Kindel was asked to confirm that, he replied, "I don’t even know myself who will take the stage." Um, aren't you the promoter? Shouldn't you know things like that? I'm thinking you should!

But for the benefit of the doubt, let's say he's telling the truth (and he could very well be) and it's Jermaine who is doing all of the booking and negotiating or whatever it is that they do to organize these things. Tell me, since when has Jermaine Jackson had such pull with the "10 biggest artists of our time"? Just curious. I must have missed that part or something because I haven't heard the name "Jermaine Jackson" 10 times in the last ten years. Now suddenly everyone who is anyone in the music business is his BFF? I don't think they are!

When Madonna's people were asked to confirm that she would be performing, her people said that she was touring and would not be appearing at the castle. Whitney Houston's people said something similar, only without the touring part. Thus, they said "no" also. So why would anyone be planning a huge concert and then start announcing names of performers who they haven't even talked to, let alone booked?! Because they can. It says so right on the tribute website: "This website does not intend to convey the impression that the artists and personalities depicted here within have agreed to participate in the said event in any way, shape or form. " Wait. What now?

It's a website promoting the tribute concert for Michael Jackson. Who else, other than either Michael Jackson OR people who are going to perform at the tribute concert, would be depicted?? It's not like it's Wikipedia with a little of something for everyone. No, it's a tribute concert website where it should be showing you who is going to be doing all of the tribute-ing! That's why they would be depicted at all in the first place! And that's probably the reason why Jermaine has continued along the lines of announcing a lineup whose participants have absolutely no idea, and in a lot of cases, no intention of performing in Vienna.

So yesterday, Jermaine announced the lineup. Here we go. Here are the participants which we were led to believe would be the 10 biggest artists of our time. Ready.....?

• Akon
• Angela Bassett
• Chris Brown
• Mary J. Blige
• Natalie Cole
• Sister Sledge
• US5 (German boy band)
  

Wait a minute. What happened to the lineup for the tribute concert? Those can't be the headliners. Those are just a bunch of names. I have yet to see a top ten artist in there. (What's with the German boy band? US5? Never heard of them. Are they German or are the from the US? Make up your mind!) What now? What do you mean that's them?!?! Angela Bassett?? She doesn't sing! Oh, sure, she played Tina Turner in that one movie, but that was a movie! She isn't really Tina Turner!

And good idea to have a guy who beats up women in there as well. Chris Brown. What a loser. Good idea, put him on a stage thousands of miles away from people who would like nothing better than to give him just a little bit of what he gave Rihanna.

And Sister Sledge? Really? Have they had a hit since 1979's "We Are Family"? When Jermaine mentioned the "top ten artists" did he mean from the current decade? I guess I assumed he did. Apparently, I was wrong. Wow.

That lineup, while not, um, horrible? While not horrible, it is hardly what I would have expected given the hype of it all. Thus, I think that the lineup is absolutely terrible considering that (wait for it) Chris Brown and Mary J. Blige say that they are not performing in the show. Wait. What now?

Correct. Chris Brown and Mary J. Blige and not performing. Yes, yes, I know the Jermaine just said that they were performing. But they're the performers and they say that they're not performing. But don't worry! According to the AP, after obvious displeasure and disappointment was heard from members of the press covering the announcement of anyone whose name Jermaine felt like throwing out there, Jermaine told the reporters, "We're very excited — the list is growing more and more (with)....many major Bollywood names and artists from the Middle East also would be involved." WTH?

Bollywood? The Middle East? That excites you, Jermaine? Bollywood? What would be a "major name" from the Middle East? Saddam Hussein? That's all I've got. Are you kidding me? Where are the real artists, like Madonna and U2? According to a defensive Georg Kindel, "This is not the final lineup — maybe some of the names you mentioned you will hear within the next couple of days." Yes, but will we hear those names in association with them playing at the tribute? Of course not. Because this is the biggest scam ever. And what's killing me is that people are buying the whole deal.

Why are there not more questions about this thing? Why isn't someone in the media looking into Jermaine's "foundation" (which will likely prove to be about as authentic as George Costanza's "Human Fund" and their slogan "Money for People") and what they've accomplished? They should! Because they will learn that it's just a scam. That it doesn't exist. That Jermaine is going to pocket millions of dollars for a concert whose main performers might very well end up being Dr. Teeth and the Electric Band!

But if someone were to investigate it, I would highly doubt that it would be the AP. And even if it was the AP, I don't know that they are capable of putting together that sort of a story. I base that assumption on this sentence from the article cited above: "Over the course of the evening, Jermaine will sing a duet with his late brother, probably with video of Michael to be projected onto nearby walls." ::::blink ::::: :::: blink :::::

Probably? Probably?! Really?! You think that in order for Jermaine to sing a duet with his late brother, that they will probably use video of Michael?! Really?! They're not going to exhume his ol' bones and have him strung up like some sort of a marionette?! Video? Really? Way to go, AP. Way to go.

Sphere: Related Content

Fake Tributes Benefiting Non-Existent Foundations

It would seem as though Jermaine Jackson has appointed himself to be the family heir. Not to Michael, but to Joseph, the Jackson's sleazy, greedy father and self-admitted beater of his children during their childhood.

Joseph Jackson, as you may or may not recall, made it very clear shortly after Michael Jackson's death that he would attempt to profit as much as he could and as soon as he could from the death of his son. I believe it was on the red carpet at the BET awards show when he was asked how his wife and other children were doing and if he wanted to make a statement. His reply? "They are all doing fine. : But I want to make this statement. This is a real good statement here. Marshall and I have -- we own a record company...called Ranch Records…It’s driven by Blu-ray technology, and that’s the next step.” Um, yeah, see, the question was more about how you were doing dealing with the death of your son THE DAY BEFORE. It's...um...odd that he would have interpreted that question to mean "Take this opportunity to promote anything you might be working on at the moment, you 80-plus year old, coattail riding, gravy train hopping, sleaze monger, you." But miscommunications DO occur. Onward!

Stepping onto the gravy train and taking the reins would be Jermaine Jackson. Now, I don't know a whole lot about Jermaine, nor do I know if there is a whole lot TO know. And I didn't do a ton of research on the guy, but I did manage to read about his marital history and the number of children he has spawned. That whole chapter told me just about what I needed to know about Jermaine. Let's see if you come to the same conclusions: The guy got married in 1973 to Hazel Gordy (daughter of Berry Gordy) and they had two children, Jermaine Jr. in 1977 and Autumn Jackson in 1978. Somewhere during the marriage, Jermaine found himself and his penis straying from his wife and allegedly ended up impregnating someone else and allegedly producing a daughter, Dawn. For some reason, Hazel stayed with Jerk-maine. Too bad Jerk-maine didn't learn from the learn from the lessons of his wayward sex organ, as he hooked up a one Margaret Maldonado whilst still married to Hazel. Do you see where this is going?

Jerk-maine ended up what? Impregnating Margaret, that is correct. Margaret gave birth to his son Jeremy in 1986. Two illegitimate children outside the confines of her marriage was enough for Hazel and she divorced Jerk-maine. I don't know if she knew that she was pregnant at the time, but she was. And she wasn't the only one. That's correct. Jermaine's wife AND girlfriend were BOTH pregnant at the SAME TIME. Stay classy, Jermaine! So then Hazel gives birth the Jaimy. Then Margaret gives birth to Jourdyn. Whew! Time for a breather.

But not a long one! (Oh, I'm FAR from done!) Margaret and Jermaine never got married (not that it would have mattered if they HAD, apparently) and they split after about 5-6 years. After that was over, Jerk-maine did just what you'd expect him to do and married his brother Randy Jackson’s ex-wife Alejandra Genevieve Oaziaza a couple of years after the split from baby factory number three. That union produced son Jaffar Jackson and another son Jermajesty sometime before they split in 2004. (By the way, Alejandra was married to another guy at the time that she married Jerk-maine. So technically, when she married Jerk-maine, she really didn't because she was already married.) His current wife is a one Halima Rashid whom he married in 2004. NOW I'm done.

Wait. One more thing. Jermajesty???

Clearly, he's not the most moral chap I've ever heard of. He also doesn't seem to have any money. So he's a broke, amoral dude whose brother just died. I mean, whose brother, who has the potential to make him millions if he just whores himself plays his cards right, just died. And he is going to ride this gravy train with biscuits for wheels straight to hell (if we're lucky). Jermaine is planning an "international tribute" to his late brother. And by "international" I mean that it's going to be held in Vienna because, of course, Michael Jackson "loved castles." Um, wait. What now?

That's right. He "loved castles". So they have to have it in Vienna? The location of the motherlode of all castles? What? There's castles in America! We have, um, Hearst! Hearst Castle! And White Castle! Geez! There's castles! Perhaps Jermaine has a bit of that 'extravagant' and 'eccentric' gene that Michael seemed to have an abundance of. Whatever it is, it's going to be in Vienna on September 26.

Now, you can't plan a tribute concert like this all by yourself. You need help. You need seasoned professionals who are good at this thing and who know what to do. That means, if you're Jermaine Jackson, you need Shawn Southwick. I said, you need Shawn Southwick. You know. SHAWN! SOUTHWICK! The wife of almost-octogenarian Larry King! Behold!

Good Lord, how did THESE two ever team up? According to the NY Post, they've known each other "for quite a while" and were going to "...sing their duet, "Will You Be There," and release a CD from the event." That according to Ms. Southwick's spokesman, Howard Rubenstein. Um, OK. Tell me, Sir Spokeshole, that CD that they wanted to release? The Jermaine Jackson-Shawn Southwick duet CD? Yeah, that one. WHO is that FOR? WHO do they think is actually going to BUY that? What type of person is clamoring for that CD? I realize that they're probably a perfect match - a money grabbing wife of a barely coherent 75-year old talk show host and a money grabbing brother of a deceased pop star, but that still doesn't explain how that pairing is going to sell CDs.

And here's where it starts to get sleazy. Er. Sleazy-er. Sleazier. According to the same said spokeshole, Howard Rubenstein, "...listed President Obama as "confirmed talent" as well as Al Pacino, Colin Powell and Richard Branson." Wait. Barack Obama, Al Pacino, Colin Powell and Richard Branson? Together at last?! Finally! Hold it!!

President Barry is "confirmed talent"? Exactly what "talent" would he be displaying that would cause it to be "confirmed"? I am unaware of any "talent", confirmed or unconfirmed, that President Barry possesses and is willing to share with the world from a stage in Vienna at a concert for Michael Jackson being staged by Shawn Southwick. That just doesn't sound like the US President that I am aware of. And as for the other three, I'll give them credit for being diverse. No credit for being realistic or logical, but diverse. They would have been more believable if their "confirmed talent" consisted of Bubbles the Chimp and Muscles the Boa Constrictor. THAT I would have believed. (It's wacky enough and it's in that same Jacko realm that we were all so familiar with before he croaked.)

Other "confirmed performers" include Usher, Lionel Richie and Whitney Houston, again according to spokeshole Howard Rubenstein. And the World Awards producer, a one Georg Kindel, "...hinted that Madonna would perform." Wow. Won't that be tricky for her to do in the midst of her "Sticky and Sweet" tour? Of course it would be! And her spokeswoman, a one Liz Rosenberg seemed to back up that notion by stating, "It's not true. She's still on tour." And Howard might want to get together with Whitney's spokeswoman and soon! That's because a one Jill Fritzo, aforementioned spokeswoman said, "Not that I am aware of." when asked to confirm the now betoothed Houston as a performer. The White House also issued a similar denial of President Barry's attendance.

So this is all crap, right? Jermaine has NO performers, does he? Yet the spokeshole for Shawn Southwick is going around spouting that President Barry will headline the "confirmed talent". Oh, wait a second. This is becoming more and more clear to me. Again, according to the NY Post, "The original promotional materials, which sought sponsors willing to pay up to $3 million..." EACH?? That's optimistic if I've ever heard optimism before. Wow. Sooooo they're definitely interested in money. And a lot of it.

Upon checking out the tribute website, I learned that "A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF THE PROCEEDS attained by The Tribute will be donated to important charities." Allegedly. The first three charities that Jermaine announced included Larry Jones’ Feed The Children, The Larry King Cardiac Foundation, and "Jermaine's own EARTH CARE FOUNDATION." Wait. What?

That's right. Suddenly, the multi-child-ed, broke, hadn't been seen in public since 2004, brother of Michael Jackson has a foundation. Allegedly. A little checking on this one seems to confirm that while there IS an Earth Care Foundation (really it's Earth Care International), they have absolutely nothing to do with Jermaine Jackson. Nothing. And apparently, in the past, as recently as 2006, he has claimed that he founded something called Earth Vision International. Again, there IS an Earth Vision International, but it's a film festival taking place in Santa Cruz, CA every year. It is NOT a Jermaine Jackson foundation. In fact, it would appear that there are NO Jermaine Jackson foundations to be found.

I feel pretty comfortable in saying that I think that Jermaine Jackson is full of crap. He's using dead Michael to drum up money for alive Jermaine. And he is shameless about it. And apparently, there is no limit to how far he is willing to go with his scams. He involved Shawn Southwick, for cryin' out loud! Need I say more?!

I kid. The man seems to be milking his brother's death for every penny he can squeeze out of it. Can anyone just SAY that they have a "foundation" even if they don't? Isn't there a penalty for that? Shouldn't you have to show or have documentation of your alleged "foundation" before putting it on your marquee as a benefactor for some grand money generating endeavor? But then again, I don't know what good that would be in this situation if he's throwing the fake tribute concert in Vienna, the land for those who loved castles. (Translation: Far enough away from the US that he might be able to get away with his fake foundation benefit scheme.)

Man, where is Michael Jackson's shady doctor at a time like this when he could really be of some use?

Sphere: Related Content

Michael Jackson and a Choir of Young Children

I told you there would be new weirdness surrounding Michael Jackson's upcoming concert series in London. There is! And it's weird all right! And if it's not weird, certain aspects of it are at the very least, extremely questionable. Not much of it sounds like a good idea. But let's begin!

Every performer who puts on some sort of concert usually has a theme for the show. It seems to often center around whatever the 'theme' is of the most recent album that they've released is. (Are we still calling them 'albums'? I know CDs isn't right because we're kind of past CDs and onto MP3s. But are they still albums? Please advise.) As you can imagine Jacko's theme is centered somewhere in the middle of his swirling universe of disconnected reality. But you can decide after reading the headline from over yonder across the pond at The Telegraph: "Michael Jackson Issued Demand for Choir of Children." Ewww. Oh, and what the hell?

Seems that Michael needs the "choir of children" for his performances. (AT THE CONCERT! Try to focus!) In an email that was sent by Michael’s promoters to the casting agents, they requested a group of children for the show and "...that the group should be made up of “exactly equal” numbers of black, white, mixed-race and Asian children." Because we have to be fair even during a comeback tour of a pop music super icon? I'm not thinking it's that so much as it is that Michael's just weird. Maybe weird is too harsh of a term. Damaged. He's definitely damaged.

So he wants a whole bunch of children to surround him while he's on stage? Is he going to be able to remember to sing? That seems awfully distracting for him. It'd be like a fat guy on stage surrounded by pizzas, wouldn't it? If it's not distracting for him, I think it might be a little bit for the audience. Especially since, according to the specifically worded email, "...the child choir must comprise singers ranging from five to 13." So, parents....are you going to let your five to thirteen year old child participate in Michael Jackson's comeback tour child choir? They'll get to be on stage with him! He might spend a lot of time with them! I'm sure there will be sleepovers in the hotel and all kinds of fun! Egads.

Now, he doesn't want to be surrounded by just any equal numbered, wide selection of varied races of singing children. Oh, no, not Michael. Not only should these children know how to sing, it's imperative that the group "...should include six marching snare drummers who must be “young adults, clean-cut and of mixed ethnicity”. Because he's going to launch into some sort of comeback production number of The Little Drummer Boy as well? Snare drummers? Who needs six snare drummers? Who needs one snare drummer?

Michael does. He needs six and he's serious, as the email also stated "They must be real drummers so please do not waste our time suggesting people who are not.” Do people DO that? Send in drummers that aren't real drummers? That seems like a futile effort. I'd like to see those auditions. ("You're the snare drummer?" "That's me!" "OK. Here. Show us what you can do with this." "What is that?" "It's a SNARE DRUM! NEXT!")

So what does he want exactly? A bunch of five to thirteen year old children who are of different races with each race being represented by the same number of children so that they can sing onstage with him. (Is he starring in a new Coke commercial? Is he teaching the world to sing for his comeback tour?) He also needs nicely groomed, young adult snare drummers to compliment his underaged choir there. It seems like a lot, but I think it's do-able. Oh, wait. I was wrong. No, it's going to be a pain in the ass because there's also "...an insistence that every child can do sign language."

Sign language?! At a music concert?! They don't have Jumbotrons over there in London? He can't have the words on a screen like one big karaoke night?! Why does a five year old who can sign need to know sign language? Who is going to be able to see them signing anyway? Have you ever seen a five-year old child's hand? It's approximately the size of a golf ball. You'd never understand what he was saying or gesturing or whatever it is. Are you kidding me?! Of course not. Because we're talking about Michael Jackson where nothing makes sense...until you remember that it's Michael Jackson and then, oddly enough, it all makes sense.

But even with the Michael Jackson disclaimer, would it make sense if I told you that the folks over at the extreme British tabloid The Sun were reporting a bit more in depth on a rumor that Jacko had also wanted a "disabled child" to appear with him on stage. They're saying he is "...looking for a child who is missing limbs or in a wheelchair to appear on stage with him at his O2 gigs." Um, wait. What now?

Yep. The Sun is saying that Jacko's promoters sent another email to "....London casting agencies asking for a kid for a film. But a source said it’s a decoy to stop tour secrets leaking." While that could be a possibility, the decoy part, I'm thinking that they could have come up with something a little less twisted and bizarre to serve as a decoy! Throw Brooke Shields back into the mix! Where's the Home Alone kid?! I think just about anything would be better than saying that he's on the hunt for a limbless youngster. It's really just in bad taste all the way around, true or not. Besides, what if the kid they find has no arms? How are they going to do all the sign language? I don't think they thought this one through!

I could cite a story from a one Daryl D who writes over there at The Examiner.com (and has some pretty interesting tidbits from his source(s) that I haven't read anywhere else. Good stuff!) and delve into how he was originally schedule to perform the song "Dirty Diana". Shirtless. But for reasons which we should all just be thankful of regardless as to what they were, that segment of the concerts has been scrapped. Whew! Had me worried there for a minute. (Had me screaming there for a minute , too. Good Lord, could you imagine?) But I'll just skip over that for now because there are a couple of other things that he's going to need as well. Hopefully they won't be as difficult to obtain and secure and the children will (strictly figuratively speaking). Yeah, he's going to need an elephant. I'm not kidding.

Again, our friends over there at The Telegraph tell us that Michael plans "...to make his entrance on an elephant and have panthers led on stage on gold chains." ::: blink ::: ::: blink ::: Of course he does. You think he's just going to stop at an elephant and what would appear to be more than one panther? No way. He's come this far. No sense in going ahead with everything unless he can "...engage the services of 100 Masai warriors for the 50 gigs in July." Masai warriors? From Masai?! I mean, Kenya. From Kenya?! But wait! There's more!

In addition to all of the warriors and the panthers and the elephant, he is also said to be wanting, "...snakes, tropical birds and three monkeys for a set that will have a jungle, circus and weather theme." Of course he does.

What happened to Bubbles? Wasn't he a monkey? No, he was a chimp. Chimp. Monkey. Does it really matter? If you're at this concert, you're not going to know where to look or what to focus on. Michael Jackson. An elephant. Panthers. Gold chains. Masai warriors. Disabled children. Underage children. Sign language. Snare drummers. Parrots. A monkey. A snake. Another monkey. Bubbles the chimp. Emmanuel Lewis. Brooke Shields. Harry Houdini. A tornado. The rainforest. PT Barnum himself. I think it's entirely possible that people's heads could really explode!

According to the paper, "He hopes to make it the most spectacular gig ever. For the jungle section, he wants to ride out on an African elephant with panthers led on gold chains. Parrots and other birds will fly behind him. If it goes to plan it will look incredible." Oh, I guarantee that the whole spectacle will be just that. It will be spec-tacular. But I'm not so sure that it's going to be in a good way. Just out of curiosity, these parrots and "other birds" that will be flying behind him? Yeah, how's that going to work? Birds don't tend to get in line and "fly behind" people. This isn't Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs meets Mowgli and the Jungle Book, you know. Has he not heard of props? Mechanical....things?

But naturally, since animals are involved, we have to hear from the Captive Animals Protection Society and their director, a one Craig Redmond, who said: "Exploiting animals in this way really is a thing of the past and not something that someone like Michael Jackson should be doing." Who should be doing it? (By the way, speaking of all of the exploiting of the animals, where does one get a panther to lead an elephant on a gold chain these days?)

Mr. Redmond added, "It would be like a circus act – a practice opposed by most people in the UK – and we are appealing to him and his management not to spoil the show by using animals." Why, yes. Yes, it would be like a circus act. It's Michael Jackson. Hence the term "circus act." He is a circus act! But don't you worry, sir! I can pretty much guarantee that even if he uses animals in his show, it's pretty much a given it will not "spoil the show". It's going to be spec-tacular. (And I'm not necessarily referring just to the talent that I know that Michael once had and maybe he still does. I don't know. I just know that if people are entertained by the oddity that is experienced when Michael just ventures out into public to buy a new hyperbaric chamber to sleep in, imagine the entertainment when he gets to orchestrate his appearance! Getting rid of the elephant won't stop the "circus act" from occurring.)

Eccentricity is fine. But when it takes you to a place where there is no relief from said eccentricity, you're kind of just a step or two away from full blown insanity, really. I mean, how realistic is all of this, really? It doesn't seem to be very much so at all to me. His first concerts are about a month away. And he's just NOW trying to secure an elephant?! That seems like something you'd have wanted to put your deposit down on a long time ago. Don't these creatures have to be tamed and trained to do things? Oooh! Maybe four of the animals that he comes up with can be taught how to sing and he can sort of impromptu some Jackson 5 stuff! Like the Country Bears Jamboree! It'd be just the same as the real Jackson 5. Only with animals and it would sound nothing like the Jackson 5.

Good luck with all of this Michael. Maybe someone will put a call out to Macaulay Culkin and see if he knows how to beat your snare drum (no pun intended). Maybe that'll help. At the very least, it'd probably make him feel better.

Sphere: Related Content

Dance Conditioning By Superheroes, For Pop Stars

The guy who played the TV version of The Incredible Hulk pre-Hulk was Bruce Bixby. He was a rather wispy fellow. Not so much Hulk-ish. And since anyone who isn't a Major League Baseball player can't just grow muscles like that overnight, they needed to have someone else play the part of the Hulk after the Hulk was angry. That actor was a one Lou Ferrigno and he spent the latter part of the seventies on TV covered in green paint and running around shirtless and with tattered pants as if he had just emerged from a desert island and was pissed! The guy had been a bodybuilder since he was 21 and won a bunch of bodybuilding contests where they get all tan and oily and flex whilst wearing a thong that is at least two sizes too small to fully contain their grundle. Sounds just perfect when you're looking for a guy to be the guy who has just grew seventeen sizes in ten seconds and burst out of all of his clothes.

That was back between 1978 and 1982. And The Hulk, well, he's still buff. And if you're in the market for, say, a personal trainer, you're probably going to want someone like him who looks like they've personally trained themselves at some point. Hopefully a recent point (you ain't payin' for a cheerleader!). But the kind of guys that I picture hiring Lou Ferrigno as their trainer are manly guys. Guys who work out. Guys who lift weights. Guys who can bench press more than 40 pounds. Those kind of guys. I do not picture some guy with little linguine like legs and pipe cleaner arms who rarely goes out in public without a surgical mask on and has named his children after bedroom furniture accessories.

Translation: I do not picture Michael Jackson hiring Lou Ferrigno to be his personal trainer to get him in shape for his upcoming concert series in London.

The Press Trust of India reports that "The superstar, who is known for his skinny frame, has asked actor-turned-trainer Lou Ferrigno to help him shape up before his much hyped comeback shows." Um, I don't think that "his skinny frame" is exactly what Michael Jackson is known for, especially lately. I could come up with a list of things a mile long that he is known for, I don't think that "his skinny frame" would be making an appearance on that list. According to Ferrigno's wife, Carla, "Lou and Michael have known each other for a long time. Lou first trained Michael 15 years ago." Really? 15 years ago? So, 1994? Let's see....what was he doing then? Taking Brooke Shields and the diminutive Emmanuel Lewis to the Oscars with a chimp in tow? No, that sounds SO eighties. OH, right! 1994! Sure. That's the year that Lisa Marie Presley went crazy and married him. Behold!

Off the subject here for just a minute, but man, what was she thinking?! Do I have questions for her! (So, what was the guest house like?) I mean, you really have to wonder about what was going on in a person's life that would make them think that getting married to Michael Jackson was a good idea. (I can't even think about putting on pants when my life is in turmoil, let alone marrying Michael Jackson. She must have been bad off. Clearly delusional!) But I digress. So, he doesn't exactly strike me as having been working out with Lou Ferrigno in that photo. But, then again, I'm not comparing it to anything. If 1994 is the after shot, I need a before shot. Where's 1993 when I need it? Behold!

Oh, yeah. See there? That makes it clear. He's HUGE in '94. Um, not so much. From the magazine covers that I've looked at, for most of 1993 and 1994 he looked like a club going lesbian in 1989. Long, permed, mulleted do. Brightly colored, long sleeve shirts buttoned all the way up to the top. Looking at those two photos above really begs the question of what in the world could he have possibly been training him for? Life post-op? Because it certainly doesn't look like weight training.

And The Times.co.za seems to confirm what I had extrapolated from the photos I had seen as they write "...Michael refuses to lift weights. He doesn’t want to bulk up.” Of course that has to be followed up with a paragraph of wacky facts about Jacko, so they add "The 50-year-old singer - who weighs a reported 126lbs and eats just one meal a day - is reportedly battling skin cancer and is said to be terrified gaining weight will damage his chances of beating the disease." Um, yeah. You look real healthy the way you are there, Mike. 126 pounds? Dude, you're 5'10"! Skin cancer or not, have a sandwich.

All right! All right! There's no need to get carried away there. Sheesh. No one wants that! Come on! How about something a little bit more believeable.

Not bad. Better. Closer to "believable", but still pretty far off. (The 1/2 lb. weight though? Nice touch.)

So what is Lou's impression of the begloved one? "Michael is more delicate. Our trainer conditioned him for dancing." I thought that "delicate" was the very definition of someone who is "conditioned for dancing"! I'm so confused. The Hulk is helping Michael Jackson with his dancing. The humanity! And "delicate"? Gee, do you think?! Behold!

I guess with Jacko refusing to do weight lifting, it is safe to assume that they won't be training with any of those overturned cars from back in The Hulk's heyday. I'm really not sure how Mr. Massive, Lou Ferrigno is going to help Michael Freaking Jackson get conditioned for dancing. Or WHY. Is it possible that Lou can teach Michael some little known secret about dance conditioning? (You know, I keep saying "conditioned for dancing" and "dance conditioning", but I have no idea what any of it means, and yet I keep saying it! Go figure.)

Maybe he saw this French dude performing his bit of perfected insanity here and thought, "That's JUST what I NEED!" Behold!

Hmmm. Maybe. It wouldn't be so far from reality if that was actually the case. But I did Google "dance conditioning" and this is one of the results I received. Behold!

A little Jacko. A little Hulk. Yeah, that could make sense. I don't what they're doing, but I am SO hoping that somewhere, somehow, someone with a little bit of video of Michael Jackson working out with The Incredible Hulk will surface so that we may all enjoy this odd little bit of pop culture conditioning. Maybe what happens is that Lou just jumps out at Michael and scares the holy crap out of him. Chases him around. Throws Volkswagens at him that he has to dodge. Maybe it's stuff like that. Hulk-based training. See if Michael can run to the top of that sand dune and jump over it before the explosion goes off. Or maybe after The Hulk bursts out of his clothing Michael has a certain amount of time to run around and find him a new outfit to wear. If he keeps improving his time, his reward is that he actually gets to dress The Hulk in his new clothes. I could see how something like that could motivate some folks. Some really strange folks.

I'm telling you right now, this is not the end. We're going to keep hearing about this tour of Jacko's and it is going to get weirder and weirder as it gets closer and closer to showtime. (Personally, I don't think the shows are going to happen. I see absolutely NO resemblance between the Jacko of today and the Michael Jackson who was the biggest celebrity in the world at one point. Those are two different people in my book. I just don't see how he can pull off one concert, let alone the 25 shows he says he's going to do. You heard it here first, but only if it actually turns out that way. If the shows actually do go on, you read that from somewhere else. Maybe the AP. CNN? They both suck lately. One of them.

Sphere: Related Content