This holds true whether there is an actual train involved or if one is describing a person whose life seems to be spiraling out of control. Sadly we seem to be seeing one of the later before our very eyes in the case of Charlie Sheen. I have not followed his career all that closely although I did enjoy the movie Major League several years ago.
Most of us are more familiar than we care to be with his bizarre behaviour of late accompanied by interviews and statements that are perhaps even more bizarre. Of course the tabloids and celebrity magazines such as People and Us are having a field day. I can hardly imagine the wealth of material that all this is providing for Letterman, Leno and O’Brien. Sheen is proving a gold mine for all these media outlets.
I read one quote from Sheen that basically said if I am insane I have no problem with that. This is not an act. Another one that is already becoming too popular is the reference to himself as having tiger blood. But are those statements any more disturbing in the long run that people saying they know they shouldnt be watching this but cannot turn away? Or how about the 1 million people who become his followers on Twitter within hours after his account was opened? Are there that many folks who care that much about what outlandish thing Sheen might do next? And if there are, why do they care?
Perhaps even more disturbing is that this latest batch of actions is something that could almost have een predicted. If one looks back at his past actions, it is not too hard to see a pattern. Or maybe one could just have asked Denise Richards. And just think about his children. I doubt that they will say about their father what almost inexplicably Martin Sheen said about his son, you are my hero.
One can only hope that as much as he has recently trashed programs and methods of help that Sheen will actually avail himself of competent , professional help, away from the media glare, far away. And mercifully may the third or fourth time for such treatment actually work.
- Guest post: Charlie Sheen, why do we care? (timesunion.com)
This coming Wednesday night, the president will deliver his first State of the Union address. Two quick thoughts and then some depth. Once again, I will be thankful for cable television that will allow other viewing options. Secondly, it will not be televised on Tuesday, so NCIS will not be preëmpted.( Gibbs would not stand for it, I guess.)
I really thought that as many speeches and television appearances as he has made that the President must have delivered the State of the Union address already. Thought it must been on Leno or Letterman, guess not.
According to David Axelrod, his political guru, we should expect a feisty, combative tone. The President will not scale back his agenda, but rather expand it further. ( That is a scary thought.) Get this, he plans to call for bi-partisan commission to tackle the budget deficit. THat take chutzpah, does it not? Axelrod also noted that people have fallen behind economically for a decade now and they are growing increasingly frustrated. Stop the presses. If one goes back a decade, who was president? Why, Bill Clinton, of course. throw in a couple of years of a Democrat controlled Congress and you have what, a shared responsibility, it would seem.
The speech the President delivered in Ohio may have been a bit of a preview. His main focus seemed was jobs and all he would do to create them. Guess he wants to a jobs president. That mirrors a recent statement made by our governor here in North Carolina. Bev Perdue says she intends to be known as the jobs governor. Hope that works out better this year than last, cause she is certainly has thrown a pile of incentive money out there and with less than stellar results. The December unemployment rate in NC was 11.2%. There are only 7 states with higher rates. Hard to be known as the jobs governor with those numbers.
Gotta wonder whether Perdue or Obama will earn that jobs title. Right now, I think would bet ( if I were a betting fellow) on neither.
Today’s Wall Street Journal speaks about the Obama Administration’s intentions regarding levels of pay for some bank employees. Public sentiment is probably on the side on the Obama folks to a degree, considering the bailout handouts. We give you money, we set your pay, right?
Well, try this one on for size. How about bank loan officers who may be paid by production. Instead of paying for quantity, pay them for quality. Good idea, maybe. But if and when government does it by mandate, that is an entirely different issue. They have or will have, close to control of the autombile industry( see Chrsyley advertising budget, elimination of 800 dealerships, etc) and no telling what may come of that. How about the Obamamobile brought to by Government(uh General) Motors?
So, I started thinking. What is another industry whose pay needs some control? How about the media? Keith Olbermann just got a $3.5 million dollar raise(can that be right?) and works for MSNBC which is owned by General Electric. I’m sure they got bailout money. That would be a good start. Perhaps, algore could take a paycut for the environment. Who pays him anyway? Mother Earth?
Now, how about Obama’s Holloywood buddies. I’m sure that if sat down with them, perhaps with some assistance from Rahm Emanuel, they could helpp the left coast folks see the light. Imagine the headlines. Hanks, Spielberg, Penn, Jolie-Pitt , Leno, Will Smith, Johnny Depp, et. al donate pay for next movie and take voluntary pay cuts for next year. Money will go to, oh I don’t know, Obama and the boys will figure it out.
That sounds better to me than Eminem and Jimmy Kimmel teaming up to fly 200 laid off auto workers to Los Angeles to see Eminem’s appearance on the Kimmel show. Oh and they will also show them a good time. Sad to say, when they return home, they will still be laid off auto workers. Maybe they should just buy some cars.
But at least Eminem is being loyal to his home of Detroit. Wonder what kind of car he drives though?
Yes, folks only here in our sorta still great country could we talk about these things in the same post. Jay Leno, President Obama, Russia and Iran. There is unfortunately an obvious and growing connection between items three and four in our list. One slight aside concerning Russia, however. There are reports about the possibility of Russian bombers being based in Cuba and Venezuela. That Hugo Chavez is such a kidder, isn’t he?
Anyway, back to our original train of thought. The White House has confirmed that the president will be appearing on Jay Leno on Thursday of this week, one day after Keith Olbermann( no comment needed) shows up.It is being billed as the first presidential appearance on a talk show since the election. Now, correct me where I’m wrong since I only see excerpts of the show due to its late hour and my ” old” age. There are usually entertainers; comedians, singers, actors etc along with a comedy monologue. Now one must ask, why would the President of the United States choose to appear in such a format?
I don’t know for certain but I have a few ideas. The President has been trying to talk down Iran, so to speak, from proceeding along its merry, nuclear pathway. He even resorted to sending a letter to Russia, asking them to intervene on our behalf. Response from Moscow, Nyet, nyet and double nyet. Or as we might put it, you have got to be kidding. So, here is political genius at work. Obama goes on Leno and pitches his plan to the Iranians( you know that Iranian President Ahmadinejad watches Leno) with the able assistance of the jut-jawed humorist. Brilliant, the Iranians will probably call in during the show, eager to agree.hey, this makes at least as much sense as offering to give up American military bases in central Europe if Russia would help( yes he did do that) mediate.
And for icing on the proverbial yellow cake, there are foreign policy “experts” and journalists who wouldn’t worry too much about Iran getting the bomb.
Shalom, my friends, shalom.
- Bible study
- Christian living
- Foreign Policy
- International politics
- Legal system
- Life and Death
- Local Politics
- State Politics