Poll after poll, the United States ranks as the most “God-fearing” nation on the planet. Good on us! Whether you believe in God or not, it’s tough to deny the reality of Christian principles being an intricate part of our country’s historical fabric.

One has to ask themselves however, as arguably the last “Christian nation” around, why were our Founders so adamant about keeping the Feds grimy paws out of our churches?

Most of Europe upheld state religions, yet only 52 percent of its citizens maintain a belief in God.

My home province of Quebec force-fed its people their state-enforced brand of Catholicism for years, yet it now enjoys the title of being the single most un-churched population of the industrialized world. Compare these statistics to the well-over 80% of Americans who believe in God and one can’t help but notice a pattern there.

There’s no doubt that the Founding Fathers were deeply spiritual men (and when I say spiritual, I mean in the Judeo-Christian sense, not in the Disney/Pray-to-colors-of-the-wind type silliness). With that being said, could it be that they wanted to separate church and state, in order to PRESERVE the Christian principles that built this country?

Think about it. When has government successfully forced people to do ANYTHING that they didn’t already want to do? From forced “integration” in Detroit, to putting a tax on a morning breakfast beverage, the results have always been disastrous.

A freedom-saturated environment is conducive to the growth of faith in God. I’m guessing that might be why our Founding Fathers were much more “spirit” rather than “letter of the law” Christians like their English counterparts.

You know who else felt the same way… Jesus.

No, really. Jesus was forthright with his whole “I am the way, the truth and the light” deal (heck he was even crucified for it), but ultimately, the man left the decision up to us.

I guess what I’m wondering now is, if the Son of Man never felt the need to force anything down our throat… Where does our government get off thinking that they can?

Americans don’t want universal health care, we’re getting it. We don’t want Cap and Tax, we’re getting it. If freedom has generally bred positive choices, one would have to wonder what comes of statism. Historically, all signs point towards revolution. Hopefully it doesn’t come to that, even though the muskets would be fun to have.

As an even bigger point, I think that the systematic removal of our individual liberties is not only anti-American … it’s Anti-Christian. Ask yourself not only how the Founding Fathers would feel about the current administrations diametric opposition to their original intentions for our country, but what would Jesus think? It sounds gimmicky I’m sure, but when you get to pondering, it can be a real trip.

Of course, whenever I find myself still in doubt I ask: What would Sean Penn do?

INEVITABLY, ANOTHER SOLDIER SNAPS

Distraught pacifist conscientious objector tormented by horrors of war, as far as you know

Newsroom experts: stress, violence, stupidity, tragedy a way of life for GIs

Former M*A*S*H stars say it’s finally time to disarm the military

Hollywood insiders: Sean Penn early favorite for lead in planned Oliver Stone biopic

Nidal Hassan – not a fan of taxes Fort Hood: Another Black Eye For Teabagger Movement Connecting the dots: 2006-8 Tax returns show anti-government extremist carefully itemized deductions Like many Town Hall protesters, Hassan motivated by rage, pattern baldness Phone records: suspect tried to join Hair Club for Men Tearful Pelosi pushes Congress for new Tea Party regulations: “our lives are at stake”

Closet Dittohead? Investigation: Ft. Hood Killer Had Access to Fox, Talk Radio, Right-Wing Blogs Receipts show killer’s apartment had cable ‘03 Nissan registered to Hassan had AM radio Napolitano: “I told you so” Sources: Despite 17 citations as Countdown’s ‘Worst Person In The World,’ FBI failed to detain Limbaugh Defiant Palin rejects calls to apologize

Hassan: NRA poster boy GUN GOES ON RAMPAGE IN TEXAS Experts say shootings could have easily been prevented if guns did not exist; others argue bullets must share blame Gun facts: scary, loud, shoot people

Reverend Nidal Hassan say Gimme that Old Time Religion Fundamentalist Religion Seen As Motive in Ft. Hood Massacre Devout churchgoer evangelized conservative views Shooter’s former Virginia home was mere hours from Jerry Falwell compound What did Tilton, Swaggert, Osteen know?

Billy Ray Hassan – average American Southerner Another Typical Day in Dixieland U.S.A. In the land of cotton, some hear echoes of Civil War in latest violent redneck rampage American-born killer was son of the Jim Crow South NASCAR may have been involved Britons warned: limit U.S. travel to safe areas such as New York, Chicago, Los Angeles

Hassan: owned GameStop member card Did Violent Video Games, Rap Lyrics Drive Killing Spree? Video: Grand Theft Auto, Super Mario Cart remain on shelf at Fort Hood PX Lil’ Wayne goes One-on-One with Wolf Blitzer Larry King Live Special tragedy coverage with panelists Nancy Grace, David Hasselhoff, Joan Collins

Tailgater of Terror Caught in the Middle of an NFC East Rivalry Sports psychologists: strain of being a Redskins fan in Cowboy country may have led to breakdown for former DC resident Jurgenson, Staubach team up for NFL sportsmanship pitch Skins fans fear backlash Special “Outside the Lines” interview with NFL Commissioner Goodell: “this is precisely why we banned Limbaugh”

Nidal “Ozriel” Hassan: tormented by popular kids ‘Ozriel’: Portrait of a Bullies’ Target Another Columbine? Sensitive, artistic outsider said ostracized by Army jocks, “in crowd” Found solace in poetry, music, MySpace Weekend “EmoAid” benefit concert to raise awareness about at-risk youth, reunite CSN&Y

Junk food junkie? Twinkies Claim Another 13 Victims Hostess corporate spokesman defends controversial creme-filled sponge cake, but mounting scientific evidence links mass murder to unregulated transfats Witness: Hassan yelled “I want a candy bar” during spree Kraft, Kelloggs, Hersheys bracing for lawsuits Are you raising a potential Cereal Killer? Nutritionists show you how to cut your kids’ sugar intake to prevent another bloodbath

No Country For Old Men From Fort Hood to Waco to Dealey Plaza to Bush Compound, death is a way of life in the Lone Star State Statistic: Texas still lags in access to public broadcasting Download Morning Edition’s exclusive in-depth podcast, complete with mournful banjo dirge interlude

Lessons of Ft. Hood: Military Bases Need More Mental Health Professionals

“The mainstream Hollywood crowd, an apologist group that enjoys traveling to Taliban-run countries such as Iran spreading their holier-than-thou “cultural understanding” of rogue regimes, has been effectively censored by Moslem clerics. Filmmaker Roland Emmerich chose not to blow up the Kaaba at Mecca in his film 2012 for fear of a fatwa (death sentence issued by Moslem clerics) being placed on his head.

“Yet, in 2005, actor Sean Penn went to cover a so-called Islamic Republic “election” wanting Americans to visit Iran and become familiar with its culture. In March 2009, director Phil Alden Robinson found that Iranians were not very different; and actress Annette Bening (surely with a headscarf given Iran’s brutal enforcement of hijab) hoped her trip to Iran would jump start a bridge between the U.S. and the mullahs in Tehran.

“These frivolous, superficial entertainers turned international political experts, who cause socio-political damages beyond the limits of this article for their misguided trips to imprisoned societies, are now censored in their own free societies by the mere thought of being personally harmed. Ironically, Emmerich’s admission may actually teach Americans about mullahcracy compliments of Hollywood.”

Read the full article here.

My apologies for bringing up old crap, but Clooney’s statement, especially the part about how he’s so proud to be out of touch, is one of the most bafflingly odd things I’ve ever heard coming from Clooney, who’s also famous for telling anyone who’ll listen that everybody tells him all the time how brave he was for making a black and white movie about the red scare. It’s very revealing that Clooney would say this, to cheers, a mere three years after a child-rapist was handed an award by that same Academy.

Cut to the present, the child-rapist is caught, and much of Hollywood is outraged. “He should be allowed to live his life,” wrote Peter Bart, his words practically streaked with tears. Hey, guess what, Pete? He has been allowed to live his life. They’re all like Clooney, proud be out of touch. But why? To answer this question, we turn to the genius of one George Costanza.

They’re different than the rest of us. They’re “delicate geniuses.”

Back to the Academy Awards, who can forget Sean Penn humorlessly, smugly, embarrassingly chiding Chris Rock for poking fun at fellow delicate genius Jude Law? Rock’s offense? A joke, dripping with truth, which pointed out that Jude Law is not a box office draw. The box office doesn’t matter to them. Hell, look at the movies they nominate nowadays. They’ve grown more out of touch than ever. You think “The Sting” would get nominated for Best Picture today? Much less win? Or “Jaws”?

And then there’s David Cross (of “Arrested Development” fame), who brags that he snorted coke near Obama. If you don’t think that’s super-cool, then you’re probably a stupid Christian. He’s one of those atheists for whom it’s not nearly enough to just not believe in God, he has to build a stand-up career out of his atheism. He’s always been strangely uninformed about Christianity, but that doesn’t stop him from cracking hipster jokes about Christians. Back in 1999, he joked that he couldn’t wait to make fun of Christians when Y2K turned out to be a global non-factor. In this hilarious segment, Cross discussed Y2K more than my Southern Baptist Pastor did in an entire year.

Cross’ cocaine story, coupled with the story last week about Academy Award fixture Hilary Swank–the she sashays around the house nude in front of her boyfriend’s six-year-old kid–illustrates what’s gone wrong with the delicate geniuses.  Hilary, please, put us on a need-to-know basis. You were way cooler when you were the underdog, the “Next Karate Kid” made good. We simply know too much about the delicate geniuses. The delicate geniuses would be more respected and adored by their audiences if they embraced a little mystery. Remember when Sean Penn crazily demanded privacy? He was sooooo much cooler then. We all knew Paul Newman was a liberal, but I never got the impression that he thought that made him smarter than his audience.

But that’s exactly how the current stars sound when they take credit for the Civil Rights Movement, or wish shame on the grandchildren of people with different opinions than their own (that’s you, Mr. Penn), or indulge us with their stories about getting a snootful of Bolivian Marching Powder while in the company of The Savior, or traipsing around nekkid in the company of kids. They’re enlightened, you see, and we’re the uneducated masses.

I know, I know, at first glance, the title may seem like I’m blowing things out of proportion. After all, Fox News is an isolated incident, right? Wrong. This is just another leg in a multi-pronged approach from the Obama administration to stifle dissent. (I just used some big words — which is out of character, I know — but go with me on this one.) Am I the only one who sees this as a wind of attacks looking to ultimately culminate into a “Fairness Doctrine” storm?

1. “Those forwarding falsehoods against the health care bill” must be reported.
2. “’Racists’ must be silenced.”
3. “Opinion journalism masquerading as news” must not be given legitimacy, or equal access.
4. David Axelrod: “We won’t treat Fox News that way, and you ought not treat them that way.”

This was the administration’s equivalent to the schoolyard bully’s call for a “PILE ON!!”

Now when observed on their own, these incidents would seem inconsequential. When combined, however, one can see a pattern of attack coming from the left that I believe (hopefully, without sounding all crazy and conspiracy theorist-like) will result in the Fairness Doctrine rearing its ugly head again. I spoke about it on “Hannity” a while back, and my opinion has only been reinforced by the most recent relentless (albeit pathetic) attack on the press.

The truth is that this White House does not want to hear ANY voices other than the echo of their own timber. It’s why Obama hasn’t met with Republicans as promised, why they’ve tried to marginalize the Tea Party movement and why they’re attacking Fox News.

This White House, is creating a villain. If they don’t pass their health-care bill, they want to be able to point to the “liars” who spread the “misinformation” that ultimately led to its downfall. Right now, the villain is Fox News. Ultimately however, YOU will be the one who is targeted. Yes folks, in all reality it is “you” who are the “liars.”

Sure, we all know that this administration is systematically attempting to target and silence voices of opposition, but we have to ask ourselves, why?
As approval ratings come in, a realization is becoming painfully clear: Leftists are diametrically opposed to the views of mainstream America. But they can’t change who they are …  however, they can change how you perceive them. This is why leftists run as centrists and hide their true identity while conservatives proudly shine a light on what they stand for.

Remember folks, “net neutrality” is just around the corner and the Fairness Doctrine will most likely soon follow. We’ve all got to be aware of what’s being played here. There is some good to come of this: All this fear coming from Washington D.C. means one thing… It means that we’re doing something right. Our voices have become too loud to ignore, and so they’re snapping back. History, however, has taught us that snapping back at the American people…? Not the smartest route.

I genuinely want to know what you folks think. Do you think the backfiring of the White House’s attack on Fox News is a sign of things to come? Do you think they’re going to overplay their hand here and dig their own grave? Did Sean Penn really deserve the Oscar for “Mystic River,” or was it a consolation prize for getting snubbed with “I Am Sam”?

As always, I want to hear from you, because the more we talk, the angrier they get.

Dissent… It’s a good thing.

Without Fidel
by Ann Louise Bardach

Chapter 12 – Raul’s Reign: The Grave Yard Shift

In October 2008, Raul Castro granted his first interview as president of Cuba – and one of the very few he has ever given. The lucky recipient was not one of the dozen accredited reporters based in Havana. Nor was it a journalist who has covered the Miami/Havana beat, nor one of the hundreds of requests from representatives from media organizations and academia who have filed requests with the Foreign Ministry. Rather, Raul Castro’s first interlocutor would be the actor/director, Sean Penn, who periodically weighs in on politics.

Penn had just winged in on a Venezuelan military jet from Isla Margarita, the picturesque island near Caracas, having had spent two days with a convivial Hugo Chavez. With him were the writer Christopher Hitchens and historian Douglas Brinkley, whom Penn had invited to accompany him, presumably to lend gravitas to his efforts. The three had hoped to reprise their luck with Raul Castro and, according to Penn, seemed to have been promised as much.

But the gods – in the form of Fidel, who orchestrated the event, chose only the movie star. Penn had met the Comandante in 2005 and the two quickly took a shine to each other. Moreover, Penn became fast friends with Chavez, of whom he was wont to say, “Chávez may not be a good man, but he may well be a great one.” Penn was now eager for an interview with [Raúl] the new president,” according to his account of the trip published in the left-leaning journal, The Nation.

Typically, journalists, myself included, who have secured interviews with Fidel, wait months, years or more. That was not the case for Sean Penn, however, who said he made a phone call, and the very next day, had his request granted. The Castros had not miscalculated: Penn proved to be as accommodating and charitable as Oliver Stone in his sunny documentaries of Fidel.

Raul Castro was a gracious and amiable host, but he made clear, through his translator, that the interview was not his idea. “’Fidel called me moments ago,” he told Penn. “He wants me to call him after we have spoken. He wants to know everything we speak about. I never liked the idea of giving interviews. One says many things, but when they are published, they become shortened, condensed. The ideas lose their meaning.’”

As it turned out, Raúl thoroughly enjoyed himself and passed seven hours chatting with his guest. He joked that he could now rival his brother in garrulousness. “You are probably thinking, ‘Oh, the brother talks as much as Fidel!’ It’s not usually so.”

Raul also passed on one anecdote that his brother, no doubt, would have preferred remain unsaid. “’You know, Fidel–once had a delegation here, in this room, from China. Several diplomats and a young translator. I think it was the translator’s first time with a head of state. They’d all had a very long flight and were jet-lagged. Fidel, of course, knew this, but still he talked for hours. Soon, one [sitting] near the end of the table, just there, his eyes begin to get heavy. Then another, then another. But Fidel, continued to talk. Soon all of them, including the highest-ranking of them, to whom Fidel had been directly addressing his words, fell sound asleep in their chairs. So Fidel, turns his eyes to the only one awake, the young translator, and kept him in conversation till dawn.”…..

Hollywood visits Fidel : from Part Three – Without Fidel

The Castro brothers had a motive for periodically broadcasting the trophies of their spycraft. They had a message for both citizens and visitors: Be careful what you say; we may have compromising data on you. One Cuban security official, Delfin Fernández, who defected in 1999, claims that the surveillance of foreign diplomats, businessmen, and even visiting movie stars with sophisticated listening devices and hidden video cameras, is routine. Fernández said he had personally spied on Jack Nicholson, Leonardo di Caprio, and supermodels Naomi Campbell and Kate Moss during their visits to Havana….

If you didn’t know any better, you would almost think that Sean Penn wants to make it extremely easy for conservatives to criticize Hollywood for being overly liberal. He’s flown to Cuba to interview his hero Fidel Castro:

Oscar-winning actor and political activist Sean Penn flew to Cuba hoping to interview its revolutionary icon Fidel Castro, entertainment news website TMZ reported Sunday.

“Sean (Penn) is going to the land of Fidel as a journalist, writing a story for Vanity Fair (magazine) about how the (Barack) Obama administration has affected Cuba,” TMZ reported…

“Barclays sources say Sean and Diana are going to meet (Fidel) Castro — presumably because that’s what Diana told them,” the website reported. Penn’s representative also told TMZ a meeting was possible.

Vanity Fair sent Penn shortly after Spanish newspaper El Pais reported that President Obama asked Spain’s Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, to talk to Cuba. “Tell Raul that if he does not take steps, neither can I,” Obama told the PM. “We are making efforts, but if they do not make efforts, it will be very difficult for us to continue.”

Is Penn truly acting on VF’s behalf, or will he go to Cuba because the Obama administration wants him to convince Fidel and Raul Castro to reach out to the U.S.?

It never ceases to amaze me that Hollywood-stars sympathize so much with ruthless dictators like Castro. You would think they understand that associating with mass murderers is harmful to their reputations. But no, they have been inside Hollywood’s leftist bubble for so long, they do not even realize the impact these kinds of adventures have on their image, both in the U.S. and abroad.

Next time Penn feels the need to interview a head of state, perhaps he could travel to Poland to talk to President Vaclav Klaus. Unlike Castro, Klaus is pro-America, pro-free markets, pro-freedom and anti-global warming; such an interview would at least be surprising.

We all know that many Hollywood insiders live inside a magical bubble where there are no consequences for anything. Serial affairs, alcohol, drugs — everything is forgiven as long as you can make money for the machine (but they are against capitalism, natch), except that most heinous of crime of all: being a conservative.  And we all know that many of them place themselves on a higher plane than those of us little people down here in the theater and stadium seats and in front of our television sets, without whom, of course, Tinseltown would be nothing but a very large (and broke) collection of overinflated egos.

Proof of this “holier than thou” attitude comes right out of the mouth of one of the biggest bigwigs himself: Harvey Weinstein of Miramax pictures:

In an interview, Weinstein said that people generally misunderstand what happened to Polanski at sentencing. He’s not convinced public opinion is running against the filmmaker and dismisses the categorization of Hollywood as amoral. “Hollywood has the best moral compass, because it has compassion,” Weinstein said. “We were the people who did the fundraising telethon for the victims of 9/11. We were there for the victims of Katrina and any world catastrophe.”

Let’s repeat that, shall we? “Hollywood has the best moral compass, because it has compassion. We were the people who did the fundraising for the victims of 9/11. We were there for the victims of Katrina and any world catastrophe.”

Well, thank goodness for Hollywood. Without them, nothing would get done. Yet, where were we, Harvey? Where exactly were “the little people” during these tragic times?

Let’s see: 403 firefighters, police officers and paramedics died on 9/11 while trying to save the lives of thousands of others, not to mention the respiratory problems of some 300 firefighters afterward and the 422,000 New Yorkers who suffered from post traumatic stress syndrome. An estimated $1.4 billion was donated by regular Americans to 9/11 charities. Let’s not forget those who stepped forward to volunteer to help in whatever capacity they could. (This is not to be confused with the “National Day of Service” that is supposed to take the place of a proper day of remembrance.)

Mentions of 9/11 at the next Academy Awards? 26.

Nearly $4 billion was raised by private, non-profit organizations for relief after Hurricane Katrina. (Sadly, much of it was misspent, but that’s not the fault of those who donated.) More than 1 million volunteers made their way to the storm-ravaged area, giving up weekends and vacation plans to help.

Yes, Hollywood held a telethon — to which average Americans donated money — where Kanye West declared, “George W. Bush doesn’t like black people.” I love those touching Kumbaya, bring-the-nation-together moments.  Don’t you?

And who could forget Sean Penn’s valiant effort to save helpless victims as he went down, shotgun in hand, and boarded a boat loaded down by his entourage that included a photographer, and ended up bailing out his sinking boat with a red plastic cup. Mission accomplished!

Last, but certainly not least, when it comes to disasters at home and around the world, we cannot forget our fabulous military. When deployed, they always act efficiently and with compassion. And our government is usually quick to donate millions to disaster-ravaged areas too, like pledging $350 million to help in the aftermath of the tsunami in Indonesia back in 2004.

By the way, when’s that telethon to help the victims of the tsunami in American Samoa scheduled?

Don’t misunderstand: if Hollywood wants to hold telethons and concerts and whatever else to raise funds for a good cause, no one’s going to complain. But let’s keep it in perspective. To quote Eugene Robinson (a Washington Post lib, no less):

The Los Angeles Times quoted Weinstein as saying in an interview that he doesn’t believe public opinion is running against Polanski — or that Hollywood is out of step. “Hollywood has the best moral compass, because it has compassion,” Weinstein said, according to the newspaper. “We were the people who did the fundraising telethon for the victims of 9/11. We were there for the victims of Katrina and any world catastrophe.”

Hollywood was there, all right, whenever the tragedy was distant, the victims were anonymous and the “compassionate” concert or telethon had acceptable production values that made all the stars look their best. How heroically they rearranged their busy schedules!

Indeed. It brings a tear even to my jaundiced eye — the red carpet, the fabulous gowns, fawning celeb mag fotogs, the goodie bags worth thousands of dollars, the after-hours VIP parties in exclusive clubs…

Back in 2007, Americans gave just under $300 billion to charity, with individuals giving a combined 75.6 percent of the total, donating almost twice as much as the next most charitable nation, the UK . And those in the poorest income brackets donate more per capita than their wealthier counterparts. Was there a star-studded telethon that year (aside from the usual Jerry Lewis gig)? I can’t recall. But how strange that many celebs are reluctant to publicly declare how much cold cash they personally donate to a cause.

So, Harvey, please, take your “moral compass” and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine. I think Americans are doing just fine without your overrated “guiding light.”

It’s exactly why every now and then a Hollywood celebrity will say that they “support our troops but not the war” or that “these men and women shouldn’t be dying in vain.” Is anybody still fooled by those one-liners anymore? Similarly in our president’s case, it’s why he continually says that he supports our troops without giving them so much as a shred of his time. I’m sure that the men and women putting themselves in harms way will understand though. After all, he’s got a meeting with one Mr. David Letterman.

For those who haven’t yet heard, Obama has met with General Stanley McChrystal (the good man in charge of leading our honorable troops to victory in Afghanistan) only once, yes, ONCE in the last seventy days. So it seems apparent that while Obama has no time to devote to the men and women of our armed services (the same people who ultimately make him look good), he has plenty of time to devote to promoting himself.

As Barack Obama devotes more time to personal press than any other president in history (in record time to boot), it’s becoming more and more glaringly apparent… Our president is more Paris Hilton than General Patton.

Just like the toolbags of Hollywood, Barack Obama’s favorite topic of the day is himself. Also, like the folks of Tinseltown, all of the problems plaguing our world today are problems that he and he alone can fix. How would he fix them, you ask?

By regurgitating rhetoric to every broadcast journalist, press-hound or comedian that will sit in front of him, of course!

*Note: The above statement does not apply to those with the last names Hannity and/or O’Reilly.

Sure, when Hollywood turns their backs on our troops, it’s wrong, and it ultimately does hurt morale. When all is said and done, however, I doubt that there are platoons of Marine’s sitting around Afghanistan sulking butt-hurtedly over Sean Penn’s most recent asinine comments. When it comes down to it, in the big picture of war, the people of Hollywood just don’t matter that much.

In contrast to that, there is a direct correlation between our president willfully choosing to ignore those fighting for our freedoms and their success in carrying out their/our mission. Which in turn means that fighting in the military with Barack Obama as Commander in Chief is not the ideal place to be.

In light of this, I’d like to recommend to you, Mr. President that you sack up and start focusing on the things that really matter. If you read below, I’m sure you’ll find that there are many people here who agree (that’s your cue to comment).

Don’t worry about the mainstream media, sir.  You can put them on the back-burner for a little while. I promise you that David Letterman will still love you in the morning.

In my humble opinion… None of the above. Death is not only a passing on, but a time for everyone else to truthfully reflect on one’s life. To skim through the unsavory parts (or in Kennedy/MJ’s case, skip entire chapters all together) is to do the world a disservice. How are the rest of us shmucks supposed to learn from past mistakes if we can’t even acknowledge them to begin with?

The fact that the media decided to smooch the Kennedys’ rears through the death of Ted is appalling. Not only was there no mention of the Chappaquiddick river “incident” or his character assassination of Clarence Thomas, but the coverage was carried out in a way that assumed everyone was in agreement with the man’s misguided agenda.

I guess I shouldn’t expect much from a media who, when covering Michael Jackson’s death reminisced of his “Thriller” days and praised his supposed upcoming comeback tour while ignoring the entire gap in between. Really, Mainstream Media? Getting kids sloshed with “Jesus juice” hidden in a soda can before escorting them to his boudoir doesn’t even deserve a passing glance?

It may sound insensitive of me, but in all honesty, I’d want my own death to be handled the same way that I’m preaching here. Granted, I’ve never killed anybody or molested any little boys but I’d want the same amount of people to dislike me in death as do in life. If you think I’m an annoying little pissant right now, please don’t show up to my funeral acting as though you felt any differently.

Basically, handle my death as the mainstream media did Ronald Reagan’s. When the Gipper died, the media made sure to cover “both sides of the story” and even sadder, they genuinely seemed dumbfounded at the fact that so many people were seriously mourning the man. They had spent such a long time painting him as an evil warmonger that they didn’t even realize how diametrically opposed they were to the mainstream American opinion.

The media’s ignorance of America’s Conservative roots are only surpassed by Barack Obama’s incapability of grasping Ted Kennedy’s “50 years in public office” as a perversion of the founding fathers intent for our government.

I get that it’s always sad to see a life lost, and my heart always goes out to a family in suffering. However, to give more credit than that to someone like Mr. Kennedy or Mr. Jackson would be disingenuous. Isn’t the truth more important than romanticizing the dead?

“Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth.” -Henry David Thoreau

Sean Penn, take notes.