Last updated 6-28-2022
So I'm driving home from work on another hot, muggy afternoon and I see a New Jersey Transit truck (pickup or something, I forget) pull onto Route 46. Now, wait a minute, I think to myself. Aren't these the guys that run those ads urging us to take the bus or train rather than add to traffic and pollution? This wasn't even a CARPOOL situation, for cryin' out loud!!! I tell ya...
The fact that Susan Smith was given a life, rather than a death, sentence indicates that not all humans are pitiless barbarians stuck in the Dark Ages. We know Smith killed her sons, though we'll never know how her mind came to that warped conclusion; however, the jurors decided to show some compassion. Hammurabi's Code was fine for the Amorites, but it's a little outdated now. If an executioner is commissioned to kill a murderer, is the murderer's sibling expected to kill the executioner in the name of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth?" If one gets satisfaction from the taking of a life, no matter whose, how far is one from the twisted mind of a John Wayne Gacy, or a Jeffrey Dahmer, or a Charles Manson?
Speaking of the so-called 'justice' system, I'm just a wee bit tired of hearing criminals referred to as 'suspects.' In a case where someone is tentatively placed at the scene of a crime by circumstantial evidence, sure, he or she is a 'suspect.' If, however, said person is nabbed by police in the process of committing a crime, or IDed by several witnesses, this is not longer a 'suspect' but a criminal! Maybe the criminal will not be convicted; this doesn't mean he or she is necessarily innocent. I don't know...
On to other things... I'm really tired of the violence-on-TV debate. I'd like to staple a V-chip to President Clinton's forehead while screaming, "How's that for violence, huh?!?" I say it over and over again, and only one or two people seem to get it: "Violence on TV (or in the movies, or on records) is a symptom of the disease, not the disease itself." Our society is sick, and something needs to be done about it, but censorship is no solution, just a temporary halt to make the politicians look good. The fact that TV programs, movies, and songs can be more graphic and explicit now that they were 50 years ago indicates that we as a society have grown more permissive. This is not necessarily a bad thing. There's nothing wrong with being able to watch a Rambo gunning down 20 men, as long as one realizes that this is not real and that really killing 20 men is a serious business. It's more disturbing to hear young people singing along with songs glorifying rape and urban violence, but again, this is a symptom of the disease. Taking the songs away doesn't change anything. It happened before the songs, and it'll continue to happen, until the problem is solved. Parents are responsible for teaching their children the difference between right and wrong; the government is responsible for making sure that wrongdoers are punished for their crimes. Neither party is doing a good job right now, though the parents rightly claim that they don't have enough time to spend with their kids. It's sad that two-income families are a brutal necessity these days; it's a contributing factor to the disease. We cannot let the government, or the industry, or any 'watchdog' group determine what is permissible and what is not for the nation's young, as though they were a homogeneous group of automatons. Maybe ten-year old Wendy is mature enough to watch and appreciate "Natural Born Killers" while her twelve-year old brother Bob isn't. The point is, their parents should know better than anyone else. Ughhh. I'm disgusted again. If you disagree with my viewpoint and can make a convincing argument, write me. I haven't heard a single point in the V-chip's favor yet.
Well, this should make me feel better: While I haven't forgiven Fox for canceling my "VR.5" yet, I have to commend them for reviving Michael Moore's "TV Nation," which a wary NBC apparently shied away from after all. The first two episodes were unbelievable, featuring such segments as TV Nation's candidate for the '96 elections Louis Bruno, an ex-con from New York ("from the Big House to the White House"); Moore himself going door-to-door at the homes of Jehovah's Witnesses handing out pamphlets and talking about the TV show that changed his life; a feature called "Payback Night," where the head of a telemarketing firm was stirred from bed by a phone call and the head of Muzak was subjected to his heinous product pumped out of huge mobile speakers in front of his home; and an attempt to crash the beach at Greenwich, CT, which is only available to obnoxious residents. If it's true that each taxpayer only contributes 64 cents annually to the NEA, then Congress had better explain the problem. Michael Moore has created the first nationally-viewed video-'zine, and I wish him the best of luck. (If you ever need a writer or reporter, look me up!) I only hope Fox has the sense, and the cojones, to stick with him, because I'm sure the show is going to draw some heavy fire from some powerful figures and groups. If the show is going to succeed on any network, it'll be Fox. Now, if we can only keep Rupert and Newt apart... Please check it out, and show your support by writing to FOX Broadcasting Co., Director of Programming, 10201 West Pico Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90035, or E-mail foxnet@delphi.com.
Last updated 6-28-2022
